
Class iL^i:^ 
Book ^-^^- 



Copyright N^ 



COFntlGHT DEPOSrr. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

VersKS 

MATERIALISM 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

VERSUS 

MATERIALISM 

THE SPACE-TIME POTENTIAL 

BY 

ARVID REUTERDAHL 

DEAN OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURES 
THE COLLEGE OF ST. THOMAS 




NEW YORK 

THE DEVIN-ADAIR COMPANY 

1920 



^^1 






Copyright, 1920, by 
The Devin-Adair Company 



AM Rights Reserved by 
The Devin-Adair Company 



NOV -2 IS20 
0)a,A60l293 



^. 



r 



TO 
MY WIFE 

ELINOR LOUISE 

THIS BOOK IS AFFECTIONATELY 

DEDICATED IN RECOGNITION OF THE 

UNTIRING INTEREST AND 

ENCOURAGEMENT THAT 

ACCOMPANIED ITS 

DEVELOPMENT 



PREFACE 

Hermann Lotze, one of the most profound philosophers 
of recent and of all times, beginning with the idea of inter- 
action, develops, in his work, a system of philosophy termed 
"Spiritualistic Monism" by Dr. Harald Hoffding. The 
author accepts only the initiatory portion of the Lotzian con- 
cept of interaction, and develops it from the standpoint of 
physical science to its ultimate negatory conclusion in his 
Theory of Interdependence. A total negation of action, 
change, and becoming is the final result of this System of 
Complete Relativity. The actual facts of cosmic activity 
and becoming necessitate the dissolution of this negation 
by a Transcendent and Immanent Activity Principle. All 
the cosmic elements are activity elements. This is true of 
energons, vitons, and souls, but actual interdependent inter- 
action of these elements is possible only through the abiding 
Eternal Life of the Absolute Principle. This is, in brief, 
what the author has named "Scientific Theism." 

The author extends his sincere appreciation to Dr. E. 
Lee Heidenreich, the eminent consulting engineer, mathema- 
tician, and philosopher of Kansas City, Missouri, for his 
keen and encouraging interest in this work. 

In the year 1896, the writer conceived his Theory of 
Interdependence as a System of Complete Cosmic Relativity 
requiring an Absolute Principle for the resolution of its 
paradoxical negations. In the same year he formulated the 
fundamental theses upon which this work rests. Basic 
amongst these theses was the conception that the laws of 
the primordial activity ultimates or particles are also the 
laws of the entire physical universe. Consequently we 
should be able to pass uninterruptedly from the activities 
of the sub-atomic particles to the behavior of such great 
material aggregates as planets. As an auxiliary or comple- 
mentary thesis the writer held that the physical universe 
is composed of matter, and not of a combination of matter 
and ether. Therefore the writer regarded the ether medium 

5 



6 PREFACE 

as a mathematical myth. Because of his Theory of Inter- 
dependence and his views that Space and Time are Forms 
of Apprehension, the thesis of Action At A Distance fol- 
lowed as a logical consequent. The first published state- 
ment of these views appeared April 5, 1902, in the Trans- 
actions of the American Electrochemical Society under the 
caption "The Atom of Electrochemistry." The greater por- 
tion of the mathematical analysis was completed in the 
year 1904, except that portion which refers to the develop- 
ment of the Keplerian laws, which was completed in Septem- 
ber, 1914. In the year 1915 the author gave his lecture 
entitled "The Space-Time Potential" at the Kansas State 
Agricultural College and at the University of Kansas. 

This work will not have proved in vain if it in som.e 
measure helps to inaugurate an era in which science, phi- 
losophy, and religion will constitute the invincible unitary 
triune guiding the soul in its search for Absolute Truth and 
Perfection. 

Arvid Reuterdahl. 
September, 1920. 



CONTENTS 
Synopsis Page 9 

Chapter Page 

I Introductory Summary ... 15 

II Some Inconsistent Concepts of 

Modern Science 45 

III Action at a Distance and the 

Ether Hypothesis .... 57 

IV The Problem of a Physical Sub- 

stratum 92 

V The Model of the Physical Uni- 

verse According to the Space- 
Time Potential 121 

VI Non-Newtonian Dynamics. The 

True Relation Between Statics 
AND Dynamics 145 

VII Some Applications of the Space- 

Time Potently 160 

VIII Electrolytic Ionization and Cell 

Action 182 

IX The Four Worlds 191 

. 7 



8 CONTENTS 

APPENDIX A A Non-Newtonian Development of 

THE Planetary Orbits . . . 207 



APPENDIX B Electrical Relations According to 
THE Dynamics of the Space-Time 
Potential 228 

APPENDIX C Calculations Involving Hyperbolic 

Logarithms 253 

APPENDIX D The Secondary Function of the 
Space-Time Potential, and the 
Electrical Charge .... 257 

APPENDIX E Electrolytic Ionization. The 
Kaufmann Effect. The Rela- 
tion OF Work Loci to the Atomic 
Structure and Diameter. Avo- 
GADRO's Constant. The Space- 
Time Potential Theory of Light 
Substantiated by Recent Astro- 
nomical Observations ... 264 

APPENDIX F Interdependent and Independent 
Motion. The Interaction Coeffi- 
cients. Some Basic Fallacies of 
Partial Relativity 273 



SYNOPSIS 

1. This work is a unification of science, philosophy, and 
religion. The fundamental truths of religion are derived 
philosophically from the facts of science. 

2. The ''Theory of Interdependence" (first conceived in 
the year 1896, and enunciated in the year 1902) is universal 
and complete, v^^hereas the so-called "Theory of Relativity" 
is particular and partial. 

3. Interdependence is the universal relativity of all 
action. It is complete mutual interaction in the entire 
cosmos. The "Theory of Relativity" follows from the geo- 
metrical relations pertaining to the sides of a right triangle 
in conjunction with the time form. These relations are then 
imposed upon physical phenomena. The "Theory of Inter- 
dependence" begins with the facts of physical action and 
concludes that every scientific statement concerning phy- 
sical activity is merely a relative statement which contains 
no absolute explanation. 

4. The Theory of Interdependence of the Space-Time 
Potential regards space and time as relative measuring 
standards of possible (potential) and actual (kinetic) 
motion and action. From the standpoint of the physical 
universe numbers are mere ratios and have only interde- 
pendent or relative significance. Physical values are com- 
posites consisting of numbers together with arbitrarily 
chosen physical units of well defined interdependent or rela- 
tive dimensions. According to the Space-Time Potential 
all physical magnitudes and values are interdependent and 
interrelated. Paradoxical as it may seem, this fact of com- 
plete interdependence of physical magnitudes is the basic 
and sufficient reason for their complete independence of the 
actual physical dimensions arbitrarily adopted for the units 
of measurement. The second and complementary paradox 
to the above, and depending upon it, is that all physical 
values are constants or series of constants. If physical 
values were variable, we should have chaos instead of cos- 

9 



10 SYNOPSIS 

mos. A so-called physical variable is merely a series of 
physical constants, in which each constant in the series 
depends for its value upon the governing conditions existing 
at the place and time of observation. Consequently- 
physical values are invariable magnitudes because they 
are ratios which are independent of the actual dimen- 
sions of the chosen physical units of measurement. 
Therefore a physical value is a fact and not a mere mathe- 
matical speculation. The third paradox is that, although 
physical values are constants, nevertheless, taken in toto 
for the entire cosmos, they are interdependent because of 
the fact that they are defined ad infinitum in terms of each 
other. This constitutes a complete and universal interde- 
pendence and relativity which forces us beyond the inter- 
dependent unitary system called the cosmos if we wish to 
find the actuating principle which is capable of transform- 
ing an otherwise dead and inert system into an operative 
and intelligible cosmos. 

5. The constant values which pertain to the interde- 
pendent physical magnitudes located within an area equal 
to one ten-thousand-millionth of an inch exemplify the Laws 
of the Space-Time Potential with the same invariable rigor 
as obtains in the case of interdependent physical magnitudes 
found within an area equal to ten thousand million square 
miles. This constitutes the complete relativity of physical 
action (kinetic or potential) to space and time. 

6. This work proves conclusively that the ether medium 
is a mathematical myth. These conclusions were verified 
experimentally by the astronomical observations of May, 
1919, which showed that light rays behave like material 
particles, being deflected by the sun's interaction when 
passing relatively close to its surface. 

7. The fundamental Newtonian concept of universal 
gravitation is regarded, in this work, as a particular case of 
universal interaction in an interdependent system. Newlon 
derived the Keplerian Laws by a complete abandonment of 
his own concept of universality. In this work the New- 
tonian form of the gravitational expression has been aban- 
doned, supplanting it with its anti-differential in conformity 
with the readily verifiable facts of the dynamics of bodies 
and sub-atomic particles. In other words, universal inter- 



SYXOPSIS 11 

action is mathematically describable in terms of the inverse 
first power of the distance, whereas the norm of the New- 
tonian law of gravitation is the inverse second power of the 
distance. In this connection it is noteworthy that the mass 
of a sub-atomic particle is inversely proportional to its radial 
distance. By means of this important modification we 
accomplish the complete unification of the heretofore 
sharply differentiated worlds of physical atoms and bodies. 
This unification avoids the necessity- of one set of laws for 
the beha\ior of atoms and sub-atoms and another set of 
laws pertaining to the activities of molecules, bodies, and 
planets. 

8. Interdependent interaction involves action and reac- 
tion in conformity v-ith the relative potential which pertains 
to the involved work loci. 

9. Interdependent interaction involves action at a dis- 
tance between all primordial material particles and their 
aggregates. 

10. An action center or kern is a mass-acceleration 
kern. Mass regarded as an independent entity* does not 
exist. Matter is composed of activity* kerns, or centers, 
undergoing change in accordance with the laws of inter- 
dependence and interaction. Mass independent and sepa- 
rated from acceleration is not a physical reality-. Accelera- 
tion apart from an action kern is merely a mathematical 
concept void of physical reality. 

11. The principle of interdependent interaction involves 
the existence of primary and secondary matter. Physical 
phenomena consist in the interaction of primary and sec- 
ondary- matter and their aggregates. Every physical action 
involves an excitant and a concurrent material system. The 
monon is the prim.ordial activity' center. The energon is a 
neutral gyratory group composed of monons. The neutral 
energon is capable of change in a twofold manner, through 
infinitesimally minute gradations, to a high phase becoming 
an electron, and to a low phase becoming a positon. Pri- 
mary matter is matter in the neutral phase. Secondan' 
matter is matter appearing as electrons and positons. 
Gra\itation is one form of interaction between molecular 
aggregates composed of groups of these ultimates. 

12. In the organic world the primordial ultimate is the 



12 SYNOPSIS 

viton. The principle of life is manifested in the viton. The 
viton is an elementary soul, lacking that potentiality which 
insures development into the highest form of conscious life. 
An organic center is the result of interaction between the 
primary activity of the viton and the secondary activity of 
secondary matter. God's ever present immanence insures 
to every organism an elementary soul or viton which is in 
harmony with its being. 

13. The unitary conscious center arises through the con- 
junction and interaction of a primary and a secondary 
activity. The primary activity is the soul, which is capable 
of manifesting the principle of free individuality. The sec- 
ondary activity is composed of highly developed organic 
systems capable of minute shades of responsive interaction. 
The soul is of God through an act of creation. 

14. Number alone is incapable of accounting for the 
great diversity of existence types in the cosmos. The ma- 
terial primordials are endowed by a creative act of God 
with deterministic character. The so-called laws of nature 
are records of the characteristic behavior of these pri- 
mordials. 

15. The phenomenon of light is a case of interaction 
between an excitant and a concurrent material system. 
The velocity of light is a constant equal to the ratio of the 
velocities of the two systems. The truth of the former con- 
tention has been proved by the recent astronomical observa- 
tions mentioned above. The latter deduction is in complete 
conformity with the Michelson experiment. 

16. The variation in the magnitude of an activity kern 
with the variation of its velocity follows as a direct conse- 
quence of the work law of the Space-Time Potential. 

17. The atom of the Space-Time Potential is composed 
of concentric work loci containing sub-atomic particles 
existing in phases ranging from the maximum radial (the 
electron) to the minimum radial (the positon) as we pass 
from the outside toward the center of the atom. This 
atomic model provides the necessary constituent variants 
to account for the spectrum. 

18. Reality may be distinguished as absolute and rela- 
tive. These two forms of reality are not identical but inter- 
related. Our theory of interdependence regards God as the 



SYNOPSIS 13 

Absolute Reality, upon whom the relative reality of the cos- 
mos depends for its maintenance and continuous existence. 
The cosmos, regarded from the physical standpoint only, is 
a relativity system devoid of an Absolute Principle. As 
such the physical universe is inert and inoperative. This is 
the ultimate philosophy of despair and pessimism. The 
relativity of interdependence finds its resolution and com- 
pletion in the Absolute Principal of Activity, God. This 
is the philosophy of assurance and optimism. The theory 
of physical interdependence results in an inert and inactive 
cosmos unless this unitary inert system is related to the 
Absolute Activity Principle, known to religion as God. 
Such a system of physical relativity ends with an ultimate 
negation of all physical action. The actual facts of physical 
action force the resolution of incompleteness into com- 
pleteness through the Life Activity of God. The complete 
theory of interdependence therefore includes the Absolute 
(God) as the physically, philosophically, and religiously 
necessary complement to the otherwise unintelligible and 
inoperative relativity system of the cosmos. Therefore 
physical interdependence becomes the greatest proof of the 
existence of God, in whom the riddle of relativity finds its 
answer and resolution. 



CHAPTER I 
Introductory Summary 

1. God and the Mechanical Model. 

Can science arrive at a consistent operative mechanical 
model of the universe without including the concept of God ? 
We answer this question with an emphatic No ! Can a con- 
sistent operative model of the universe be derived by the 
introduction of the concept of God? This question we 
answer with an equally emphatic Yes 1 The writer presents 
his discussion of these questions in the following chapters. 
The present chapter constitutes a synopsis of our position 
freed from its mathematical developments. 

2. Pure Mechanism Futile. 

When science, philosophy, and religion are placed to- 
gether in the melting-pot of reason the result is the refuta- 
tion of materialism. The scientific materialist denies the 
validity of the result for the reason that, for him, two of 
the ingredients in the melting-pot are worthless ; philosophy 
is mere fantastic speculation, and religion is naught but an 
emotional phenomenon having its root in superstition. 
Materialists ignore the fact that every branch of science has 
its empirical and its speculative components ; the empirical 
dealing with experimental facts, and the speculative dealing 
with the mathematical interpretation of these facts in terms 
of such scientific concepts as molecules, atoms, electrons, 
force and energy. We propose to show that speculative 
science, dealing as it does mathematically in concepts and 
^'convenience unknowns," fails utterly in its attempt to 
construct a real world because of its refusal to admit the 
philosophical and religious interpretations of the world as 
a valid contribution to knowledge. In the following it will 
be shown that the concepts of science are unintelligible, 
inconsistent, and ineffective without the fundamental and 

15 



16 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

basic assumption of the existence of a rational, teleological, 
and purposive activity principle which unifies and vitalizes 
all reality into an ordered intelligible cosmos. Without the 
concept of God the conscious and the unconscious world 
become unintelligible. A mechanistic theory of the uni- 
verse based upon mere materialistic concepts is rationally 
impossible. A mechanistic theory of the cosmos, grounded 
in the concept of God, and including teleology and purpose, 
is not alone rationally possible, but is the only theory which 
is consistent with fact. Such a mechanistic theory of the 
world is in agreement with empirical science, conforms 
with the results of philosophical reflection, and satisfies the 
demands of the religious consciousness. In other words, 
such a mechanistic world is an ordered spiritual cosmos, 
and not an irrational materialistic chaos. The physical uni- 
verse becomes intelligible as a sublime and divine machine 
of wondrous potentiality, complexity, and diversity, vital- 
ized by an eternal rational purpose. The phenomenal 
>vorld is a manifestation of God in a Space-Time Potential. 

3. Basic Principles. 

The two principal tasks confronting us are: first, to 
show that the concepts of materialistic science are invalid 
and inconsistent because of their failure to include a 
rational, selective and purposive activity principle as their 
basic common element; and, second, to present a physical 
model of the universe which owes its ultimate significance 
and operativeness to that Eternal Being known to the reli- 
gious consciousness as God. A candid and unbiased analy- 
sis of the data of empirical science, taken in conjunction 
with its speculative, hypothetical and interpretative sub- 
structure, forces us to accept the validity of the following 
basic principles : 

1. The immanence of Divine Intelligence throughout the 
universe. 

2. The cosmos as a unitary, interacting, rational, pur- 
posive and teleological system. 

It follows that the physical universe is a finite projection 
of the Infinite in Space and Time, not independent of, but 
totally dependent upon, the immanence of God. The cosmos 
is a part of the infinite potentiality of God made actual in 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 17 

a finite manifestation in space and time and in accordance 
with causation. The Space-Time Potential is that dynamic 
chart in which the eternal potentiality of the Spirit of God 
phenomenally manifests itself. It also follows that the phy- 
sical universe, being a rational system, may be interpreted 
mathematically as a system exhibiting law and uniformity. 
A mechanistic model for this system may be conceived. 
The model is inoperative unless the validity of the first 
principle be assumed, and it is totally inadequate without 
the admission of the truth of the second principle. More- 
over, physico-chemical forces are mere mathematical ex- 
pressions devoid of a genuine activity principle unless both 
of the above premises are admitted as true. Consequently 
the reduction of vital phenomena to the physico-chemical 
forces of materialistic science is equivalent to the negation 
of becoming and change. Furthermore, becoming and 
change are inexplicable under any assumption which denies 
the validity of the two before-mentioned principles. The 
Space-Time Potential constitutes a direct challenge to 
materialism. 

In this introductory synopsis we shall briefly discuss the 
fundamental hypothesis of science in order to prove the 
correctness of the contentions already enunciated, 

4. The Unknowns of Science. 

The Fundamental Concepts of Materialistic Science 

In order to build a harmonious logical structure, modern 
science finds it necessary to invent terms expressive of 
certain phases of physical phenomena. Consequently we 
find in treatises upon particular branches of science, such 
terms as "the charge carried by an ion or electron, tubes 
of force, electrical field, ether, force, energy, matter, cen- 
tral force, attraction, repulsion, pressure, temperature, 
acceleration, velocity, momentum, mass, density, etc., etc." 
These terms of science may be broadly divided into two 
classes: those which pertain to phenomenal phases which 
are directly observed by the senses ; and those which refer 
to phases which are inferred to exist either as physical ante- 
cedents or causal factors in the network of phenomena. 

An inferential concept created by science for the pur- 
pose of rationalizing the observed facts of phenomena is of 



18 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

the nature of an unknown physico-mathematical X, The 
scientist may assume one of two attitudes toward these 
physico-mathematical unknowns in his phenomenal equa- 
tion ; first, he may maintain that such unknowns are merely 
necessary conveniences introduced in order to complete the 
phenomenal equation without claiming actual reality for 
them; second, he may claim genuine reality for these 
thought creations in order to vitalize and actualize the 
observed phenomenal experience. If the scientist takes the 
second position he becomes a philosopher and a meta- 
physician. He may deny this assertion, but it is neverthe- 
less true. Generally the scientist who aligns himself with 
the second attitude is a total failure as a philosopher and 
metaphysician, either because he is not in sympathy with 
the philosophical attitude, or because his lack of philo- 
sophical training prohibits him from developing a con- 
sistent, rational system. In either case such a scientist is 
profuse in his denunciations of that which savors of meta- 
physics, even if he himself is responsible for the un- 
scientific creation. In order to avoid the pitfalls of 
the second attitude a great number of scientists seek 
refuge in the first position. This class of scientists create 
unknowns with impunity because they do not feel the 
restraint of responsibility for their creations. Making no 
claims for the reality of their concepts, they feel no lia- 
bility in regard to the content injected into them. Phy- 
sico-mathematical conveniences are regarded, by this scien- 
tific school, as having a right to exist on the principle that 
the end is justified by the means. In so far as such instru- 
ments of convenience deal with the genuine realities of a 
physical yvorld they have no independent, unquestionable 
birthrigHt, consequently we may justly demand that they 
be consistently defined and definitely related to that world 
order whose explanation is their only reason for existing. 
It is held that science finds its only legitimate and consistent 
field in the recording and correlation of experimental facts. 
The recording and correlating of these facts finally takes 
the form of some mathematical expression involving both 
types of factors, the observed and the inferred. This is 
particularly unfortunate for those who desire to avoid de- 
fining, interpreting, and relating the inferred factors to a 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 19 

real world. This class of scientists attempt to avoid account- 
ability for such "convenience unknowns" by saying that 
they care not what they are, but what they do. 

5. Scientific Concepts Defined. 

In order to examine the significance and implications of 
the concepts of modern materialistic science we shall briefly 
define them. 

1. Mass is the Quantity of Matter. 

2. Velocity is distance traversed in a Unit of Time. 
Involves both Space and Time. 

3. Acceleration is the increase or decrease in Velocity. 
Involves both Space and Time. 

4. Force is, or is measured by, Mass multiplied by Accel- 
eration. Involves Space, Time, and Mass. 

5. Kinetic Reaction is, or is measured by. Mass multi- 
plied by Acceleration. Involves Space, Time, and Mass. 

6. Impulse is, or is measured by, Force multiplied by 
Time. Involves Space, Time, and Mass. 

7. Work is, or is measured by, Force multiplied by Dis- 
tance. Involves Space, Time, and Mass. 

8. Energy is, or is measured by, the Capacity for doing 
Work, or it is the Stored Capacity to overcome Force 
through Distance. Involves Space, Time and Mass. 

9. Ether is Matter to Zero, or Infinite Limits including 
the ordinary Force functions correlated with Matter. It is 
Super-Matter and Force. Involves Space, Time, and Mass. 

In order to define "Quantity of Matter" the materialistic 
scientist introduces the term Mass. When he is called upon 
to define "Mass," he states that : 

Mass is, or is measured by. Force divided by Accelera- 
tion ; or Mass is, or is measured by, Kinetic Reaction divided 
by Acceleration. 

In the fourth item he has defined Force as being Mass 
multiplied by Acceleration, and in the fifth item he has 
defined Kinetic Reaction as being Mass multiplied by Accel- 
eration. Consequently, "Quantity of Matter" has- been 
defined in terms of Force and Acceleration, or Kinetic Reac- 
tion and Acceleration. Now since Force and Kinetic Re- 
action have been defined in terms of "Quantity of Matter," 
Mass, and Acceleration, it follows that the circle here com- 



20 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

pletes itself, and therefore it is clearly evident that the 
materialistic scientist has defined neither "Quantity of Mat- 
ter" (Mass) nor Force and Kinetic Reaction. 

6. The Closed Chain of Concepts. 

It follows from the above definitions that the material- 
istic scientist has failed to define the concepts, Impulse, 
Work, and Energy, for the reason that he has not given us 
a satisfactory definition of Force. Hence Impulse, Work, 
and Energy are included in the closed circle of his specu- 
lations. Of the nine items considered there remain the 
terms Velocity, Acceleration, and Ether. The last term will 
be disposed of later in our discussion. Both Velocity and 
Acceleration involve the notions of Space and Time. In 
fact, all the concepts owe whatever significance they may 
possess to the meaning of Space, Time, and Mass. We have 
seen that Mass is in the closed chain including Force, 
Kinetic Reaction, and Acceleration. 

7. The Empirical Position of Science. 

Is it pertinent for us to ask the materialistic scientist 
to define Space and Time? By his own definitions he has 
been driven back to the notions of Space and Time as funda- 
mentals. His own definitions have defined nothing because 
he has been caught in a circle which he has not been able 
to cut. He has forged a closed chain of interdependent con- 
ceptual links without being able to enlighten us in regard 
to the independent significance and meaning of a single 
link. In regard to the notions of Space and Time the physi- 
cist may reply that the yardstick and the chronometer satis- 
factorily represent space and time for him. He is not 
interested in any metaphysical speculations concerning the 
ultimate nature of space and time. In that case the physi- 
cist becomes an empiricist who deals only with experimental 
data. As an empiricist he will be well within his rights 
if he formulates working hypotheses to assist him in the 
further pursuit of physical data. 

8. Faith in the Rationality of the World. 

If he claims any further significance for his working 
hypotheses, then he must show that they are in complete 
agreement with the fullest significance of reality. An 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 21 

attempt to do this will take him beyond the bounds of em- 
pirical science, forcing him into the field of "metaphysical 
speculation.'' We have the right to demand that his working 
hypotheses be consistent and true to reality. Moreover, 
any hypothesis which purports to introduce a real activity 
principle into the universe must be defined, not by an argu- 
ment in a circle, but by a distinct idea harmonious with the 
totality of the universe. If it is his desire to build a genuine 
dynamic world of becoming and change, then his concepts 
must partake of a basic concept capable of accounting for 
the real activity manifest in the cosmos. This basic concept 
must potentially include all the observed functions in the 
physical world. This fundamental concept must include 
reason, purpose, and teleology. Without purpose and tele- 
ology, the world becomes irrational. Ultimately our 
thoughts and actions rest upon faith in the persistence of 
a rational world order. Moreover, every inference and 
deduction arrived at through the process of thought is 
based upon the fundamental premise that the world is 
rational. This premise cannot be derived through the 
method of logic. Lack of faith in this as the fundamentally 
given makes knowledge impossible and transforms cosmos 
into chaos through an absolute skepticism. Such a skepti- 
cism is self-destructive because it is based upon the self- 
annihilatory assertion that the only truth in the world is 
that there is no truth. 

9. The Activity Principle. 

The mechanistic models evolved by the materialistic 
scientists are based upon the concepts enumerated above. 
Since they constitute a closed chain, their actuating dynamic 
principle must be found either within or without the closed 
chain. It should be evident that no genuine and real ac- 
tivity principle is found within this closed chain. Neither 
Force nor Energy can constitute this activity principle, be- 
cause the former is defined in terms of Mass and Acceleration 
and the latter is measured in terms of Force and Distance. 

This activity principle cannot be defined in terms of 
Mass, because Mass is defined in terms of Force and Accel- 
eration. Underlying the notion of Acceleration we find the 
basic notions of Space and Time. In view of the preceding, 



22 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

the significance of the title "Space-Time Potential" should 
be apparent. 

It may be affirmed that in the synthesis of the concepts 
of either Mass and Force, or Mass and Energy, the sought 
activity principle may be found. The mere putting together 
of two concepts, neither of which contains a third necessary 
concept, is a totally ineffective procedure. Nothing can 
come out of this mere synthesis other than that which is 
previously contained in the constituents. Furthermore, if 
the three concepts, Mass, Force, and Energy, are to be given 
genuine independent significance, at least one of the con- 
cepts must be independently defined. As defined by science 
they are interdependent and relative, and as such have 
naught but relative significance. Speculatively, however, 
science thinks of Mass and Force as separate and distinct 
entities totally different in their ultimate nature. This is 
another glaring inconsistency in the annals of materialistic 
science. The convincing "forcefulness'' of the word Force 
has a seductive effect upon the reasoning faculties. Through 
centuries of scientific repetition this word Force has 
bewitched the reason. It is the great ignis fatuus of science 
which lightens the dreary quagmires of materialism. 
Within the closed chain of scientific concepts we find noth- 
ing capable of generating an activity principle. In their 
totality these materialistic concepts cannot generate one 
single physical action. The unbiased thinker is forced to 
the conclusion that the closed chain is impotent and 
incapable of evolving a mechanistic model which can pulsate 
with genuine action. The inference is forced upon us that 
the actuating dynamic principle must be sought outside of 
the closed chain in the Life of God. The immanence of God 
in the world then follows as the only hypothesis which will 
account for cosmic activity. 

10. The Gods of Science. 

We have been taught to bow in reverence before the 
shrine of materialistic science and to worship its physico- 
mathematical gods, and we are expected by materialism to 
revere no other God, for there is no God other than those 
manufactured in the laboratories of materialistic science. 
Stripped of their technical adornment, these gods of science 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 23 

prove to be nothing more than inert clay energized from 
time to time by hypodermic injections of powerful doses of 
the calculus. Science has accomplished wonders through 
experimental research, but when materialism tries to con- 
struct a consistent cosmos from materialistic concepts, then 
reason receives its greatest insult. The materialistic scien- 
tist is a total failure when he tries to enter fields beyond 
the confines of his laboratories. We are tempted to make 
the sweeping assertion that most scientists are incapable 
of consistent thought when dealing with the problems of 
reality. We have exposed the weakness in the very founda- 
tion of materialism. Even the least initiated layman in 
science must revolt at the thought of giving reverence to 
the impotent Closed Chain of Concepts manufactured in 
the laboratories of materialism. This closed chain of 
science has no peer in the archives of fallacy. The House 
of Materialism is built upon a conceptual substructure com- 
posed of the most blatant fallacies ever inflicted upon an 
unsuspecting public. The forging of the closed chain by 
the blacksmiths of materialism is the greatest crime ever 
committed against reason. 

In the above we have shown that the fundamental con- 
cepts of materialistic science have no significance when 
applied to reality. They contain no real actuating prin- 
ciple as their common basic element. Consequently, the 
world built up by materialism is incapable of exhibiting 
phenomenal activity. We have admitted that empirical 
science has accomplished marvels, and has been a power in 
the uplift of mankind. We have conceded that for science 
the working hypothesis is indispensable. We have cau- 
tioned science not to claim too much for its working 
hypotheses. They must be consistent with facts. We 
demand that science cease its scoffing at religion and phi- 
losophy because of its total failure to deal consistently with 
problems outside of its own domain. We insist that religion 
and philosophy be restored to their rightful place in the 
domain of human affirmation and knowledge. 

11. The Blunder of Materialism. 

In the preceding discussion we have shown that the 
House of Materialism is built upon the quicksand of a Closed 



24 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

Chain of Concepts. Not one conceptual link in the chain 
is independently defined. Taken in toto they contain no 
real activity principle capable of explaining the smallest 
fragment of physical action. This colossal blunder of mate- 
rialism forces us to look with suspicion upon its claims to 
superhuman intellectual sagacity. The speculative sub- 
structure of materialistic science is devoid of common 
sense. It is not flattering to the intellectualism of the pres- 
ent century to be forced to admit that a large percentage of 
sincere thinkers have been completely hoodv^inked by the 
impotent barrage of intricate mathematics sprayed over the 
battlefield of materialism's Armageddon. 

Some Auxiliary Concepts of Materialistic Science 

12, Lines of Force. 

In this paragraph we shall put some of the much cher- 
ished auxiliary concepts of materialistic science to the test of 
common sense. We shall begin the investigation by a con- 
sideration of the Tube of Force developed by the eminent 
English physicist Sir J. J. Thomson, Professor of Experi- 
mental Physics in the University of Cambridge. A few 
citations from Thomson's "Electricity and Matter" will 
bring the notion before us. "If iron filings are scattered on 
a smooth surface near a magnet they arrange themselves 
in well-marked lines which can be traced from one pole of 
the magnet to the other ; the direction of these lines at any 
point coincides with the direction of the magnetic forces, 
while the intensity of the force is indicated by the concen- 
tration of the lines. ... I have spoken so far only of 
lines of magnetic force ; the same considerations will apply 
to the electric field, and we may regard the electric field as 
full of lines of force, which start from positively and end on 
negatively electrified bodies. ... To Faraday the lines 
of force were far more than mathematical abstractions — 
they were physical realities. Faraday materialized the 
lines of force and endowed them with physical properties 
£0 as to explain the phenomena of the electric field. Thus he 
supposed that they were in a state of tension, and that they 
repelled each other. Instead of an intangible action at a 
distance between two electrified bodies, Faraday regarded 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 25 

the whole space between the bodies as full of stretched, 
mutually repellent springs. The charges of electricity were, 
in this view, just the ends of these springs. An electric 
charge was an extensive arsenal of springs spreading out 
in all directions to all parts of the field. ... If through 
the boundary of any small closed curve in the electric field 
we draw lines of force, these lines will form a tubular sur- 
face, and if we follow the lines back to the positively elec- 
trified surface from which they start and forward on to the 
negatively electrified surface on which they end, we can 
prove that the positive charge enclosed by the tube at its 
origin is equal to the negative charge enclosed by it at 
its end."^ 



13. Tubes of Force. 

Tubes constructed from lines of force constitute the 
Tubes of Force of Thomson. He gave the name 'Taraday 
Tube" to a tube of force which enclosed a unit charge. He 
states that "motion of the Faraday tubes is accompanied 
by the production of magnetic force."^ In his "Notes on 
Recent Researches in Electricity and Magnetism," Thomson 
states : "The result of the different effects on the energy of 
the atom produced by the incidence of a Faraday Tube will 
be the same as if the atoms of different substances attracted 
electricity with different degrees of intensity. . . . The 
Faraday tubes when they reach a conductor shrink to 
molecular dimensions."^ 

The reader is here advised to draw a long breath for the 
sake of his health, and in recognition of the seeming pro- 
fundity of the Thomsonian speculations. Let us examine 
the Thomsonian pretensions to profundity. 

When iron filings "arrange themselves in well-marked 
lines" are these lines physical realities or are they merely 
lines along which physical realities arrange themselves? 
Faraday maintained that the lines of force were physical 
realities in order to avoid the Supreme Terror of Material- 
ism, which is Action at a Distance. This bogy of material- 



^ Electricity and Matter, pp. 8, 9, 10, 14. 

'Ibid., p. 18. 

' Recent Researches in Electricity and Magnetism, p. 



26 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

ism has always haunted the scientist and driven him to 
invent mathematical sticks v^ith which to bridge the vacuous 
abysses between material particles. The Thomsonian Tube 
and the Ether are mathematical sticks manufactured for 
the purpose of beating the bogy into insensibility. For the 
"simple-minded" believer in God this bogy has no terror. 
Mathematical sticks are mere worthless playthings vener- 
ated by materialism. In the following we shall show that 
with a proper understanding of the nature of Space and 
Time in their relation to the Finite and the Infinite, Action 
at a Distance need cause us no consternation. Faraday's 
claim of physical reality for the line of force involves Thom- 
son in the same contention for his tube of force unless he 
repudiates the Faraday interpretation. Thomson speaks 
about "effect produced by the incidence of a Faraday Tube." 
He also refers to the "motion of the Faraday tubes." These 
statements would indicate that Thomson believes in the 
physical reality of his tubes. The incidence of a tube could 
produce no effect on anything unless it possessed physical 
reality. The tube may be a thought, a metaphysical concoc- 
tion, a ghost, a mathematical essence or extract, an emotion, 
a superstition, or any thingless something, in which event 
the materialistic scientist would frown with horror at the 
notion that such a "nothing" could do something and pro- 
duce effects. Thomson may reply that a tube of force is 
composed of lines of force and therefore the tube is very 
"forceful" and can accomplish almost everything. 

14. Force is not an Entity. 

What, then, of the line of force ? Is it a mere line or is 
it force ? If it is force, then we ask Thomson what he means 
by the effects produced by the incidence of force on the 
atom? Is force an entity distinct from matter? If so, 
then we must assume that force is of an immaterial nature. 
Materialistic science does not admit that the immaterial can 
produce effects upon the material. Materialism holds that 
all physical change is brought about by the action of one or 
more material groups upon another material group. Science 
defines force in terms of the product of mass and accelera- 
tion. If force is not immaterial and an entity independent 
of and distinct from matter, then this definition conveys no 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 27 

more information than the fatuous statement that the 
amount of change in a matter group is proportional to the 
product of its mass by the resulting observed acceleration. 
In other words, if we compare the product of mass and 
acceleration in one matter group with a similar product for 
a second matter group and find the latter to be twice the 
former, then the inference is that the amount of the change 
sustained by the latter is twice that of the former. No sane 
person can regard this inference as indicating exceptional 
intellectual acumen. If this is the intent of the definition 
of force submitted to us by science, then we have merely 
been shown how to measure the amount of the change 
observed in a matter group. What is the reason, then, for 
the feverish desire of science repeatedly to flaunt the word 
"force" before our eyes? If the latter notion be the scien- 
tific intent of the word "force," then the term is superfluous. 
Mass and acceleration are sufficient for the purpose indi- 
cated. The word "force," however, has always contained a 
peculiar mystical charm for science, and it has been exceed- 
ingly useful in covering a multitude of sins. Unfortunately 
for science, the term "mass" has been defined in terms of 
force. Again we hear the monotonous rattle of the links 
of the closed chain. If science admits that force is a genuine 
immaterial entity manifesting itself in the physical uni- 
verse, then the House of Materialism crumbles. Material- 
ism has then dug its own grave. We have seen that the 
work of science hinges upon the validity of the statement 
that the world is rational. If this is not admitted, then the 
achievements of science are worthless. Given a rational 
world order and an immaterial force, and we are not far 
distant from the concept of God. Through its own con- 
cepts science is forced to the concept of God. 

15. The Monon or Force Center. 

We must not leave the remarkable tube hypotheses with- 
out a reference to the curious contention that the tubes are 
in a "state of tension, and that they repel each other." We 
can conceive of tension in a material body, in which case 
science accounts for this state as being due to the action 
of a force, whatever science may think that it means by 
force. If force is an irrational, immaterial entity, then sci- 



28 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

ence must show us how force acts upon matter. If force is 
matter, then science faces the problem of explaining how 
matter acts upon matter. Science has not explained either 
possibility. If force is merely a mathematical term, then 
it is worthless as a principle of action. If force is a rational 
activity principle manifesting in the universe, then we dis- 
cern the immanence of God in the physical world. A 
rational world order cannot have been produced by an irra- 
tional entity; hence whatever notion we hold concerning 
force, it cannot be irrational. No process of evolution can 
ever generate the rational from the irrational. Possibly 
Thomson wishes us to think of his tube of force as a self- 
mover, a thing of primitive and rudimentary life, in which 
event it would be able to produce effects upon things other 
than itself. If this be the Thomsonian notion, then the tube 
must be endowed with at least a fragmentary portion of 
selective intelligence, otherwise it could not behave in a con- 
sistent and uniform manner. If the principle of selective 
intelligence be conceded to the tube then the foundations of 
materialism fall and we are again brought face to face with 
the concept of God. The tube of force of Thomson, after 
due consideration, proves to be a very hollow concept. The 
concept has merely helped science to round out its complete 
fiasco of impotent hypotheses. According to the view of the 
Space-Time Potential, force and matter never were distinct 
entities. The definition given to us by science proves this 
contention. The dualistic position of materialism is a com- 
plete failure. We find the solution of the dilemma of mate- 
rialism in the variable unity of force and matter in a 
genuine Monon or Force Center which owes its entire sig- 
nificance to the immanent rational activity of God in the 
physical universe. 

16. The Failure of Conceptual Bridges. 

The dualistic theory that force and matter are distinct 
entities involves science in an unending chain of difficulties. 
Force must find its way from one group of matter to 
another; it must make itself known from one material 
aggregate to another such aggregate. As a consequence of 
these difficulties there arose the much mooted question if 
forces can make themselves known at a distance without the 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 29 

intervention of a transmitting vehicle or medium, or if 
force effects must have a medium through which they can 
travel from one group to another. Science has always 
abhorred the vacuum. For that reason it created the notion 
of a medium or ether to bridge the gulf between matter 
groups. We shall show that this attempt of science is a 
total failure. All the sticks and glue of materialism never 
will bridge the gap. The concept of God is the only con- 
cept which will bridge it. With this concept, Action at a 
Distance loses its terrors and the ether hypothesis becomes 
entirely unnecessary. 

17. The Ether as a Materialistic Substitute for God. 

In every instance where materialistic science has obsti- 
nately resisted the introduction of the concept of God into 
the physical universe it has been caught in a maelstrom of 
inconsistencies. This is true of the frantic attempt of 
materialism to substitute the concept of the ether for the 
concept of God. Materialism has always looked upon the 
introduction of the concept of God into the physical world 
as the unforgivable sin. The ether has been one of the main 
weapons used by materialism in its attempt to drive God 
out of the universe. If the world had not been completely 
etherized into unconsciousness by the results attained by 
empirical science, then the ether hypothesis would long ago 
have been regarded as mere speculation devoid of logical 
consistency. The physical content of the ether has been 
determined by the rigorous method of mathematics. Imag- 
ine, for a moment, the reliability of such a farcical pro- 
cedure ! No genuine physical proof of the existence of the 
ether has yet been produced by science. The ether is an 
inferential unknown sprinkled by science into the voids 
between matter particles. What ingredients have been used 
by science in the manufacture of the ether hypothesis? 
The calculus plus awe-inspiring differential equations mixed 
with as many inconsistencies as could be rammed and 
tamped into the confines of its most accommodating infinite 
lack of limiting boundaries. There are almost as many 
ethers as there are physicists. Certain resemblances to 
matter are evident in every ether hypothesis. The ether 
model is always based upon certain fundamental properties 



30 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

of matter, reduced either to zero or raised to infinite limits. 
The continuous occupation of space is common to all of 
them. Matter is here and there. Ether is supposed to be 
everywhere. Hence we have, in the notion, the space 
occupation of matter raised to infinity. At the outset 
it was a protest against the emission theory of Newton. 
When it is thought of as a solid it is endowed with 
incompressibility. 

Other theorists ascribe infinite compressibility to the 
ether. F. Neumann and MacCullagh adhered to the incom- 
pressibility notion, while Fresnel preferred the hypothesis 
of infinite compressibility. We are told by some physicists 
that the ether is structureless, incompressible, motionless, 
but capable of being set into motion, non-elastic, capable 
of indefinite subdivision, and that the resulting parts can 
move over each other without friction. No known physical 
reality in the universe satisfies these specifications. Empty 
space (vacuum) qualifies better than any form of matter. 
If the ether is not mere empty void, then the specifications 
are more closely satisfied by the supposition that the ether is 
real but immaterial. Certainly the ether cannot be material 
in its nature and satisfy the requirements imposed upon it 
by physical phenomena. After all is said, the ether is 
merely an imagined realization of the physical requirement 
that at every instant there shall everywhere be a reality 
which is in intimate responsive connection with matter. 
This reality cannot be material in its nature, for no form 
or type of matter will satisfy its requirements as outlined 
by science. The writer, in his Space-Time Potential has 
considered all the phases and implications of the ether 
hypothesis. In every form of the hypothesis one basic ele- 
ment is missing, without which the ether model becomes 
inoperative. This basic element is selective intelligence. It 
is not to be inferred that the addition of the element of 
selective intelligence will make the ether model operative; 
on the contrary, the hypothesis is so filled with incon- 
sistencies that it is beyond redemption. The absence of the 
element of selective intelligence, taken in conjunction with 
the fact that the sought for reality must be immaterial, 
indicates that we are again face to face with the concept 
of God. Any possible future substitute for the ether 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 31 

hypothesis will involve similar difficulties and inconsist- 
encies unless the concept of God becomes the basic element 
of its hypothetical content. The concept of God solves the 
riddle of the physical universe. All the concepts of science 
cannot displace it as the keystone of the universe. The 
inadvertent groping of materialism for a substitute for the 
concept of God has opened the door of reality and brought 
to us the realization that its search is futile unless it admits 
the fundamental truth of religion. 

18. The Contribution of Boscovich. 

The problem of Action at a Distance has always been 
a bugaboo to the scientific world. Stated concisely, the 
question is, Can matter act where it is not? Must discrete 
portions of matter be connected by an intermediate some- 
thing, a medium, plenum, or ether, by means of which one 
material system can be placed, as it were, en rapport with 
another distant material system? Daniel Bernoulli 
answered the former question in the affirmative and denied 
the necessity of a medium. Ruggiero Giuseppe Boscovich, 
the brilliant Jesuit mathematician, physicist, and astrono- 
mer, professor of mathematics at the Collegium Romanum, 
in a work entitled "Theoria Philosophia Naturalis," pub- 
lished at Vienna in 1758, maintained with Daniel Bernoulli 
that action at a distance is possible through an absolute 
vacuum. For him matter consisted merely of force centers 
endowed with inertia, and all physical and chemical activi- 
ties were explainable as mutual attractions and repulsions 
varying in intensity vdth the magnitude of the intervening 
distance. The prophetic vision of Boscovich concerning the 
ultimate nature of matter has recently been verified by the 
researches of Kaufmann (1903), J. J. Thomson, Heaviside, 
and Searle. These famous physicists may be loath to admit 
that they have experimentally verified the contentions of 
Boscovich concerning the nature of matter. In fact, we sus- 
pect that they would reprimand us in no uncertain language 
if we insinuated that they have contributed one iota to the 
force-center theory. Dr. Rutherford, referring to the work 
of these men in his book entitled "Radio-Activity," says: 
"The above results are therefore in agreement with the view; 
that the mass of the electron is altogether electrical in 



32 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

origin and can be explained purely by electricity in motion."^ 
In his "Electricity and Matter," J. J. Thomson states : "I 
have calculated from this expression the ratio of the masses 
of the rapidly moving particles given out by radium to the 
mass of the same particles when at rest, or moving slowly, 
on the assumption that the whole of the mass is due to the 
charge, and have compared these results with the values of 
the same ratio as determined by the Kaufmann experiments. 
These results support the view that the whole mass of these 
electrified particles arises from their charge."^ 

19. The Divisibility of the Atom, 

The eternally stable and unchanging atom of Dalton is 
gone forever. The atom is composed of sub-atomic parts. 
It is a veritable microcosm, a minute planetary system 
whose constituent parts are in continuous motion. It is 
composed of such smaller primordial parts as electrons or 
corpuscles whose mass is not fixed, but changes with a 
change in velocity. Science measures force in terms of the 
product of mass and acceleration. In the electronic particle 
we have a changing entity whose magnitude is measurable 
in terms of force. Therefore we assert that scientific re- 
search has brought us back to the force center of Father 
Boscovich. 

20. Mass and the Ether. 

Further on in the same work, Thomson continues : "All 
mass is mass of the ether, all momentum, momentum of the 
ether, and all kinetic energy, kinetic energy of the ether. 
This view, it should be said, requires the density of the 
ether to be immensely greater than that of any known sub- 
stance."' It is evident that Thomson is no intentional sup- 
porter of the force center theory of Boscovich. Again the 
ether becomes the scapegoat for the farcical speculations of 
science. Thomson also states that "the whole mass of any 
body is just the mass of ether surrounding the body which 
is carried along by the Faraday tubes associated with the 



* Radio-Activity, p. 112. 

' Electricity and Matter, pp. 47, 48, 51. 

^Ibid,]}. 51. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 33 

atoms of the body."' In speaking of the constitution of the 
atoms, Thomson says : "Let us then take as our primordial 
system an electrical doublet, with a negative corpuscle 
(electron) at one end and an equal positive charge at the 
other, the two ends being connected by lines of electric force 
which we supposed to have a material existence."'' 

We are told by science that the mass (quantity of mat- 
ter) of the electron (or corpuscle) is altogether electrical 
in origin. The whole mass is due to the electrical charge. 
Then we are informed that the whole mass of any body is 
just the mass of ether surrounding the body which is car- 
ried along in the moving van composed of Faraday tubes 
associated with the atoms of the body. Atoms are composed 
of negative corpuscles and positive charges hitched together 
with material ropes called lines of electric force. The mass 
of any body is not the mass of the body, but it is the mass of 
the ether which surrounds it. The mass of your body is the 
mass of the clothes which surround you. Atoms are com- 
posed of electrons. Electrons are electrical. Electricity is 
mass, and mass is ether, and the ether must be immensely 
denser than a materialist, or any other known substance, 
in order to behave properly. Lines of electric force are 
material. Matter is electrical. Thus the materialistic 
scientists disport themselves on their conceptual merry-go- 
round whilst the calliope of materialism shrieks its weird 
song, "Great is the Ether of the Materialist!" We have 
disposed of the ether as an absurd, fantastic inconsistency. 

21. Physical Action Involves Action at a Distance. 

Returning to the problem of Action at a Distance, we 
have shown in the Space-Time Potential that physical action 
is impossible unless we assum^e that action at a distance is 
possible. The assumption that contact in space is the indis- 
pensable preliminary condition for mutual action is of no 
avail because we must explain why and how spatial contact 
causes previously independent and alien things, states, or 
forces to become interested in each other, thus producing 
the phenomena of change. The fundamental error under- 
lying all scientific hypotheses is the supposition that things 



^Electricity and Matter, p. 51. 
'Ibid. 



34 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

are independent. If things are independent, then action at 
a distance becomes inconceivable. The gap between inde- 
pendent things must be bridged. Consequently science drags 
forth its conceptual sticks and glue in order to unite the 
independent things. If the things of the physical universe 
are independent, then all the conceptual sticks and glue of 
science cannot make them mutually dependent. Materialism 
has struggled to build a consistent model of the physical 
universe from independent things and scientific concepts. 
We have seen the House of Materialism crumble because of 
its inconsistent and impotent hypotheses. The failure of 
materialism is complete. We shall show in detail in the 
following chapters that physical action is impossible unless 
we admit the mutual dependence of all centers of reality 
in an interacting unitary system. In such a system action 
at a distance is easily comprehended and loses all its repul- 
siveness. This interacting unitary system is the finite pro- 
jection of God in Space and Time. The eternal immanence 
of God maintains the system. 

22. Summary o£ the Criticism. 

In the preceding critical review of the position of science 
we have shown : 

1. That such scientific concepts as mass, force, energy, 
and work are conceptual links in a closed chain, out of 
which science cannot extricate itself. Within this closed 
chain there is no genuine activity principle capable of gen- 
erating physical action. The actuating principle must 
therefore be found, outside of the closed chain, in the Life 
of God. 

2. That such auxiliary concepts of science as tubes of 
force and the ether, strangle themselves by their own incon- 
sistencies. Every concept of science can be shown to be 
merely a link in an impotent closed chain. Without the con- 
cept of God these scientific concepts have no real signifi- 
cance. Many of the concepts, like the tube of force and the 
ether, are so grossly inconsistent and inconceivable that 
they must be abandoned if science desires to retain even a 
vestige of self-respect. Concepts like the tube of force and 
the ether are attempts of materialism to get along without 
the concept of God. These attempts have proved total fail- 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 35 

ures. In trying to bridge the voids between matter groups 
by ethers and similar fantastic and irrational, concoctions, 
science, by its own blunders, has led us face to face with the 
concept of God. 

3. That the horror of materialism for the vacuum is at 
the root of its obstinate refusal to admit the possibility of 
action at a distance. Science, in committing the error of 
refusing to admit action at a distance, implicated itself in 
the more fundamental error of assuming that things are 
unrelated and independent. A rational world order cannot 
be constructed from unrelated independent things. We 
must admit the mutual dependence of all centers of reality 
in a world system which is unitary and interacting. If 
we do not admit this, then a physical universe is impossible. 
The unitary interacting system, composed of centers of 
mutually dependent reality, is itself merely an inoperative 
phantom of speculation without the concept of God's main- 
taining immanence within the system. Every physical 
action involves the possibility of action at a distance. Mere 
spatial contact affords no means of accounting for physical 
action. In a unitary interacting system maintained by the 
immanence of God, action at a distance is easily com- 
prehended. 

4. That the experimental method employed by science in 
its investigation of physical phenomena has brought great 
blessings to mankind. We give this method our hearty 
approval. Through this fruitful and sound method science 
has inadvertently and unintentionally reduced matter to a 
form of reality totally different from its own cherished 
notions of fixedness and eternal permanence. The atom 
has been shown to be composed of sub-atomic parts capable 
of mass variation with changes in velocity. The resistive 
ability of these sub-atomic parts, known as electrons or 
corpuscles, is all that remains of their materiality. The 
complete physical measure of the magnitude of the electron 
must involve the product of its two constituent variables, 
that is, mass and acceleration considered as two phenomenal 
aspects of a single unity. Science has given the name of 
force to this product. It is evident that scientific research 
has, consequently, dematerialized matter and given us a 
center of reality alien to matter and identical with force. 



36 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

The vision of the great Jesuit physicist, Father Boscovich, 
has been unintentionally verified by the recent investigations 
of science. The force center of Boscovich is the ultimate 
unit of physical reality. Boscovich ascribed the property of 
inertia to his force center. This inertia of the Boscovichian 
force center corresponds to the resistivity of the primordial 
particle. The materialists have inadvertently given a spir- 
itual significance to the physical universe. We cannot con- 
ceive a rational universe arising from an irrational activity 
principle. Therefore force is a manifestation of a rational 
actuating principle immanent in the physical universe. Con- 
sequently the concept of God becomes indispensable to the 
existence of the physical universe. Thus we observe that 
materialism has dug its own grave. 

The above epitomized facts, together with the deduc- 
tions therefrom, form the basis of the Space-Time Potential, 
whose salient features will now be considered. 

23. Fundamentals of the Space-Time Potential. 

The basic principles of the Space-Time Potential are : 

1. The existence of God. 

2. All reality owes its existence and maintenance to God. 

3. The immanence of God throughout the universe, and 
also His transcendence. 

4. The cosmos is a unitary, interacting, rational, pur- 
posive, and teleological system. It is a finite projection 
of the Infinite. 

These fundamental principles, having been established 
by a process of deduction from the known to the unknown, 
constitute the fundamental truths upon which our system 
is based. Upon these basic truths we can construct a con- 
sistent model of the universe. If these truths are not 
granted, a consistent model cannot be constructed. These 
fundamental verities must be incorporated into any model 
of the physical universe if it is to be a true representation 
of a dynamic world of becoming and change. 

The finite projection of God, manifest in space and time, 
may be subdivided into three worlds: (1) The World of 
Energy, Force, and Life; (2) The World of Conscious 
Selves; and (3) The World of Subconsciousness. The 
Space-Time Potential deals only with the physical universe, 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 37 

and hence its problem is the interpretation of the manifes- 
tation of God as the ultimate source of the Potential charted 
in Space and Time. 

When we speak, in the third basic truth, of the imma- 
nence of God, we do not think of God as a machinist stroll- 
ing about the universe with an ever-ready oil cup with which 
to oil the creaking bearings of the cosmic machinery. On 
the contrary, we think of the universe as a completed finite 
projection, capable of exhibiting through secondary causes 
those uniformities which we call natural laws, yet incapable 
of continuous existence in space and time without the con- 
tinuous sustaining potential of God's unceasing existence. 
By "immanence" we mean the continuous dependence of 
the cosmos upon the Being of God. We also use the word 
"immanence" to convey the thought that God*s interest in 
His create universe is continuous and does not cease with 
the act of create projection. The dependence of the phy- 
sical universe upon the maintaining activity of God is some- 
what analogous to the steady flow of water in pipes due to 
the maintenance of an uninterrupted pressure-head. Remove 
the pressure-head and the water ceases to flow. Similarly, 
in the case of the flow of electricity, this phenomenon 
depends upon the continuous maintenance of a difference of 
electric potential. 

24. The Existence of God Proved from the Facts of Science. 

Physical Proof of the Existence of God. 

The Space-Time Potential involves a physical proof of 
the existence of God. Science defines the potential energy 
of a body as being equal to the work required to bring the 
body from that position in which its potential is equal to 
zero to the point of known potential. Consequently the 
potential at any point is equal to the work done in bringing 
a unit mass from an infinite distance to that point. Now to 
bring a body or particle through an infinite distance requires 
an infinite time; therefore this hypothetical body has not 
yet arrived at its destination, and it can never arrive within 
the confines of this physical universe. To regard the uni- 
verse as infinite merely makes the problem more impossible. 
Hence, whether we regard the physical universe as finite or 



38 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

infinite in no way changes or affects the conclusion. It may 
be contended that this argument is worthless if it be 
assumed that the primordial elements have always existed 
and that for the elementals of the universe there is neither 
a time of beginning nor a time of ending. This contention 
in no way affects our conclusion, for the reason that what- 
ever potential a particle may possess at any given point in 
space at any particular moment in time, this potential is 
equal to that which would have been produced if the particle 
had previously traversed an infinite distance in order to 
arrive at the given point. Now an infinite distance or time is 
not a completed something. The term "infinite" means 
nothing at all unless it refers to some type of process which 
cannot be completed. For this reason the appeal to an 
infinite time is futile. It follows that the observed potential 
of an actual particle or body existing in the physical uni- 
verse may be attributed to the following sources: 

1. To a motion of the particle through an infinite dis- 
tance. 

2. To an actuating and energizing agency within the 
system of the physical universe. 

3. To an actuating and energizing agency without the 
physical universe. 

We shall consider these possible assumptions in the 
order given. 

1. We have shown that the first supposition is impos- 
sible because a motion through an infinite distance involves 
motion which cannot be completed in either finite or infinite 
time. Infinite distance or infinite time means that which 
cannot be completed. If it does not mean this, it has no 
meaning at all. 

2. The injection of the idea that the particle is located 
an infinite distance from some given point is resorted to 
for the purpose of giving the particle a zero energy or 
potential value. The procedure therefore involves the fur- 
ther assumption that the potential energy of the particle has 
changed from zero potential to a potential other than zero. 
Was this change in the energy of the particle brought about 
by the particle itself or by some other particle? It could 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 39 

not have been brought about by the original particle with- 
out ascribing to that particle the possibility of originating 
something out of nothing, in which case the result would 
be due to a genuine creative act, and the particle must, in 
that event, possess an attribute which we ascribe only to 
God, the Creator of all things. If we maintain that the 
potential of the given particle is due to the actual potential 
of one or more other particles, then we demand that the 
source of their potential be shown. An attempt to evolve 
the potential of these other particles involves the same fruit- 
less procedure as for the given particle. The search 
through the universe for a particle or particles which can 
supply us with this initial source of potential is conse- 
quently futile. Therefore no particle exists within the phy- 
sical universe which can supply us with the initial source 
of energy. 

3. It follows that the observed potential of any particle 
or body existing in the physical universe is due to an actuat- 
ing, energizing principle other than the mere physical con- 
stituents or force functions extant within the physical uni- 
verse. Again we are forced to the conclusion that God, 
and God alone, is the source of the difference in potential 
existing in the physical universe as manifest in the Space- 
Time Potential. The dynamics of the physical universe, 
that is, the ability of particles to interact, depends upon 
the continuous maintenance of a difference of potential 
through the activity of God. This conclusion does not 
involve God in individual activities from particle to particle 
ad infinitum, but it does mean that the final potential differ- 
ence ultimately reached is maintained by the activity of 
God. The universe is otherwise a complete uniformity 
within itself. We have therefore proved the existence of 
God by using the facts of physical science. Our reasoning 
is like that of St. Paul the Apostle, in his Epistle to the 
Romans, Chapter I, verse 20: "For the invisible things of 
Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being 
understood by the things that are made, even His eternal 
power and Godhead ; so that they are without excuse." The 
existence of God has been proved by reasoning from the 
known phenomena of the physical universe. Without a 
difference of potential, physical action of any kind what- 



40 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

soever is impossible. We have shown that from this fact 
it follows that the physical universe is impossible without 
the concept of God, and materialism has been shown to be 
the greatest fallacy of the ages. 

The justification for the use of the word "potential" in 
our title is now apparent. The significance of the "Space- 
Time'* in the title will be evident from the considerations 
which follow. In the first article we defined the funda- 
mental concepts of science and showed that all the concepts 
are, in their final analysis, related to and dependent upon 
the notions of space and time. The term "mass" has been 
reduced to a force manifestation in space and time. The 
meaning of the terms "space" and "time" is therefore essen- 
tial to our system. 

25. Space Defined. 

Space is a form of apprehension or awareness which 
permits the intelligible relations of bodies to exhibit them- 
selves to us as an externally ordered arrangement. Space, 
then, owes its full significance not only to the perceiving 
subject, but also to the existing intelligible relations between 
things. 

26. Time Defined. 

Time is a form of apprehension or awareness which 
permits the intelligible arrangement of events to be pre- 
sented to us as interrelated, durational, and successional 
series. Both these subjective forms depend upon the intel- 
ligible coherence of all that is real as that basic element 
which generates them through interaction of subject and 
object. 

With this view of space and time, action at a distance 
is readily granted. We have proved by a detailed discussion 
of the problem in our Space-Time Potential that actual phy- 
sical phenomena are impossible without the admission of 
the possibility of action at a distance. 

27. The Primordial Activity Center, The Monon. 

The most elemental create reality manifest in the Space- 
Time Potential is the force center of Boscovich, to which 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 41 

the writer has given the name "monon." The spatial back- 
ground is a chart of potential energy values in which the 
kinetic energy centers, the monons, manifest at definite 
positions or points. The monons, in addition to being 
energy, are potential matter. Therefore we assign them 
the fundamental property or capability of exhibiting resist- 
ance to that which tends to give them acceleration ; in other 
words, we attribufe kinetic reaction to them as their basic 
phenomenal property. The monon is capable of exhibiting 
both a negative and a positive phase of activity. The nega- 
tive phase appears as kinetic reaction or resistance. The 
positive phase, due to its intrinsic content of kinetic energy, 
is manifest as attraction. Both attraction and repulsion are 
included in the content of the monon. Since kinetic reaction 
involves a potential or possible mass coupled inseparably 
with a possible acceleration, we include these factors in the 
content of the monon with full realization that mass and 
acceleration are mutually dependent variables capable of all 
the shades of variability from a minimum to a maximum. 
Within certain critical values we may therefore find that 
the variation of mass of the monon is practically reduced 
to its zero limit; in other woras, below this critical value 
the mass of the monon may appear to oe -naintained at a 
constant value. 

28. The Energon. 

The further development of our system requires that 
its kinetic energy be defined, in part, in terms of motion, 
for the reason that all mechanico-physical phenomena are 
ultimately reduced to terms of motion. This involves the 
existence of gyrational groups of monons. A rotary system 
composed of two diametrically opposite monons constitutes 
our simplest gyratory group. We have given the name 
"energon" to this gyratory group. Like the monon, the 
energon must include both attraction and repulsion in its 
content. In order to meet the requirements of certain class 
phenomena like the phenomenon of light, we consider these 
phenomena as being due to the interaction of a translatory 
system and a vibratory and translatory auxiliary system. To 
the former we give the name "excitant system," and to the 
latter we apply the term "concurrent system." 



42 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

29. The Excitant and the Concurrent System. 

The simplest physical phases of interaction are repulsion 
and attraction, reaction and action. These opposed forms 
of physical action represent the negative and positive 
phases of all types of reality regardless of complexity. The 
negative and positive functions are not independent exist- 
ences ; on the contrary, both are manifestations of a primary 
unity, the former insures the self-preservation and survival 
of the center of reality, while the latter provides for pos- 
sible attractive manifestations. In physical action of a 
vibratory order the differentiation of the unity of physical 
reality into two systems of the excitant and the concurrent 
is in complete harmony with the basic facts of physical 
action, which always involve action and reaction. Both the 
excitant and the concurrent system are ultimately com- 
posed of the same kind of discrete energy group. We dis- 
card the notion of a continuum or ether, because of its 
many contradictory and ultra-material concepts. The same 
properties and laws of action pertain to both the excitant 
and the concurrent system. This gives us a hypothetical 
physical basis for a theory of relativity. The velocity of 
light becomes the limiting constant in the relativity system. 
Ultra-atomic velocities approach this limit but do not reach 
it. The constancy of mass disappears and its variable 
dependence upon concomitant phenomena appears as a real 
factor in physical change. In the mathematical portions of 
the Space-Time Potential the writer has developed the rela- 
tions between mass variation, velocity in general, and the 
velocity of light. The results are in agreement with the 
researches of Kaufmann. The Space-Time Potential is 
a system of relativity. 

30. The Three Phases of the Energon. 

In order to account for physical action we assume that 
the energon is capable of change in a twofold manner from 
its neutral condition. Consequently there is involved an 
ascending process and a descending process. The former 
involves a definite work increment, the latter involves an 
equal work decrement. The three corresponding phases ot 
the energon may be designated as the high, the neutral, and 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 43 

the low phase. In the high phase the energon becomes an 
electron. In the low phase the energon becomes a "positon." 
The word *'positon" indicates that the energon exists in that 
phase which is the extreme of the electronic. The primor- 
dial energon constitutes the neutral phase of the variable 
system. A negative charge is always associated with the 
free electron. We associate an equal positive charge with 
the positon. In the last analysis the magnitude of this 
negative and positive charge depends upon the work incre- 
ment and its equivalent work decrement. Work expended 
is always equal and concomitant with work stored. Ions 
in solution exhibit these three phases in accordance with 
the precise phase change in the energon. Since all inter- 
action presupposes the concomitance of both the ascending 
and descending processes, it follows that the products of 
solution must appear as ionic pairs. In this we have a con- 
sistent hypothetical reason why molecules break down into 
so-called ionic pairs. 

31. The Planetary Orbits from, the Standpoint of the Space- 
Time Potential. 
One of the fundamental assumptions of the Space-Time 
Potential is that whatever laws pertain to the elementals 
of the universe, these laws pertain also to their aggregates 
irrespective of their magnitude. Consequently the story of 
the microcosm, the little world of sub-atomic particles, 
atoms, and molecules, is also the story of the macrocosm, 
composed of those great aggregates of elementals which we 
know as planetary and stellar bodies. Therefore any system 
which must introduce arbitrary constants in passing from 
the microcosm to the macrocosm in order to account for 
the gaping discrepancies between the enormous energies 
exhibited during interaction by the sub-atomic particles 
and those shown by ordinary physical bodies, cannot 
be a true representation of the physical universe. This 
is the case with modern science. This inconsistency 
is not encountered in the Space-Time Potential. The 
laws by which we interpret the activities within the 
microcosm are equally applicable to physical action in 
the macrocosm. We are not forced to inject arbitrary con- 
stants in order to bridge the enormous energy differences. 



44 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

Our mathematical investigations, based upon the Space- 
Time Potential and agreeing with the results of research, 
bear out this contention. 

32. Qualities Essential to the Monon. 

We hold that the physical universe cannot be explained 
by mere number alone. Thomson has tried to build up the 
different types of atoms by increasing and decreasing the 
number of the constituent sub-atomic particles constituting 
his model. The procedure is analogous to the following : 

One pound of sugar plus one pound of sugar equals two 
pounds of sugar. Two pounds of sugar plus one pound of 
sugar equals three pounds of salt. Three pounds of salt 
plus one pound of salt equal four pounds of salt. Four 
pounds of salt plus one pound of salt equal five pounds of 
pepper. In other words, the different types of atoms are 
due to a difference in the number and arrangement of the 
constituent particles. We contend that the primordial ele- 
mental possess characteristics and qualities which differen- 
tiate one elemental from another, and that the great diver- 
sity manifest in the physical universe cannot be accounted 
for by mere number and mechanics. 

We realize fully the lack of continuity and convincing 
clearness which has been inevitable because of the brevity 
of this exposition. This difficulty we hope to overcome in 
the following chapters. We have attempted to indicate the 
fundamental elements in a physical system which depends 
for its significance upon the concept of God. We have tried 
to interpret consistently the phenomenal world and its 
activities. It is with a full realization that God knows better 
that we have presented this humble interpretation of His 
create work. 



CHAPTER II 
Some Inconsistent Concepts of Modern Science 

33. The Critique of Mathematics. 

Modern science overrates the value of mathematics in 
the interpretation of physical phenomena. In very many 
cases the results of a mathematical investigation are postu- 
lated as physical realities. There is a great difference 
between pure mathematics and applied mathematics. Pure 
mathematics involves the forms of thought in their relations 
to space, time, and number. The fundamental premises 
required in the field of pure mathematics are grounded in 
the content of the rational mind. This is true irrespective 
of the manner in which this content has developed. Conse- 
quently the premises of pure mathematics are logically veri- 
fiable. In the field of applied mathematics, including phy- 
sical science and engineering science, the premises cannot 
be verified through mere logic. They have no value unless 
they truly represent reality. The mathematical analysis may 
be correct, but the result is worthless if it does not agree 
with the facts of reality. This means that the premises 
were initially in error. Applied mathematics, therefore, is 
merely an experimental science by which we test the validity 
of the initial premises. The final test lies in the facts of 
reality. The hypothetical creations of applied mathematics 
are mere fictions possessing no value unless they are true 
counterparts of physical reality. Many of the "convenience 
unknowns" of physico-mathematics are worthless because 
they do not truly represent reality. 

34. The Ether. 

The ether is just such a "convenience unknown." It 
has been adorned with "well-defined'* properties. Its phy- 
sical content has been determined by the "rigorous method 
of mathematics." Imagine, for a moment, the reliability 

45 



46 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

of such a farcical procedure ! Despite the fact that no phy- 
sical counterpart for the ether has even been discovered, 
nevertheless the ether advocate knows both v^hat it does 
and v^hat it is. Of course, it may be many things, some of 
which involve extraordinary inconsistencies — in fact, self- 
contradictions of such gross proportions that if the ether 
were any of these alleged "somethings" it could not con- 
sistently possess certain other properties imputed of vital 
importance to its physical structure. The ether is an infer- 
ential unknown. Unlike matter, the ether cannot be 
observed by the senses. Consequently the physicist who 
ascribes definite properties, qualities, and mathematical 
content to the ether enters the very zone of speculation 
which he holds in such ill-repute. 

35. Force. 

When we consider the prevailing scientific notion of 
force we are confronted with a concept which is placed by 
science in the category of "what they do" factors. Through 
this expedient the physicist hopes to avoid the responsibility 
of defining his "convenience unknown." Questions relative 
to "what it is" are lightly set aside as irrelevant even if 
somewhat irritating. Scientists seem to be in perfect accord 
with one another in defining force as that which tends to 
produce change in the state of rest or motion of matter. 
Physicists primarily regard force as the "mover" of matter, 
the active dynamic factor in the physical universe, an entity 
distinct from, but capable of acting upon, that other inde- 
pendent entity called matter. We are here confronted with 
a dualism of matter and force. Has it been possible for 
science to adhere strictly to its self-imposed attitude of 
refusing to consider the problem of what force is ? 

36. Tubes of Force. 

Maxwell and J. J. Thomson, employing the primary con- 
cept of Faraday's lines of force, developed systems which 
make it possible to consider mathematically the quantitative 
relations obtaining in magnetic and electric phenomena. 
J. J. Thomson, in attempting to visualize the activity factor 
called force by science, adopts the electric line of force as 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 47 

the unit from which the so-called Faraday tubes of force 
are constructed. He considers a charged body (whatever 
that is) to have its external surface divided into small areas, 
each exhibiting the same amount of charge. Emanating 
from the boundary lines of these small areas are lines of 
force which enclose regions of tubular configuration consti- 
tuting the Faraday tubes. The system is completed and 
becomes active when a second body is introduced upon 
whose surface the other, previously unemployed, ends of 
the lines of force can rest. These opposite ends, immedi- 
ately upon the entrance of the second body into the system, 
seek out areas upon its surface; arranging themselves 
methodically along the boundary lines. This performance 
is concomitant with the appearance of an electric charge 
upon the small areas of the second body. This secondary 
electric charge upon the small areas bounded by the tubes 
is of equal magnitude but opposite in nature to the charge 
upon the surface of the first body. We are curious to learn 
if the secondary charge either lurked in the vicinity of the 
second body or within its confines before the tube pounced 
upon its victim. Perhaps this secondary charge was merely 
a possible charge which became real the moment the tube 
touched the surface. Possibly we ought to consider that it 
is the tube that constitutes the charge and that the two 
ends thereof agree to differ. We may be unfair in our 
questions; for, is not the word "concomitant" sufficiently 
awe-inspiring to prohibit levity in any form, and cannot 
so potent a word annihilate all tendencies to inquire into 
physical antecedents and relationships ? In fact, it is main- 
tained that all that is meant by a charge on a body is that 
a Faraday tube ends upon its surface. Moreover, the motion 
of a Faraday tube is what constitutes the flow or passage 
of an electric current. This hypothesis regards the phe- 
nomena of electrostatics as cases of tubes at rest. The 
notion that opposite charges exist at the opposite ends of 
the tubes involves the hypothesis in difficulties which have 
made it necessary to modify the original conception, result- 
ing in the supposition that each charge is attached to a dis- 
tinct and separate tube which is its own individual prop- 
erty. A charged body differs, then, from an uncharged 
body merely in the fact that the charged body carries a 



48 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

supply of Faraday tubes protuding from its surface much 
like the quills of a porcupine. A Faraday tube cannot be a 
general prototype of force, because if such is the case, then 
every physical phenomenon involving a manifestation of 
force would also exhibit that physical or metaphysical some- 
thing called a charge. Consequently force in the form of a 
tube must be a distinct force species which exhibits an 
electrical charge. A charge-tube, then, is as distinct a type 
among force forms as the porcupine is among animals. A 
cross section of a Faraday tube, no matter where taken, 
exhibits merely lines of force. The cross sections may differ 
in their form and size, but not in the fact that an area is 
bounded by lines of force. Nevertheless, we are requested 
to concentrate our attention upon the ends of the tubes, 
for it is there that the charge either resides or appears. 
However, a material aggregate is necessary for the appear- 
ance of the hidden factor called the charge. We are de- 
cidedly out of order if we impertinently inquire whether the 
charge is located somewhere in the tube, or somewhere in 
the body, or possibly in neither tube nor body. Possibly the 
hole in the end of the tube constitutes the charge. Perhaps 
the particular shape of the tube end is an electrical charge. 
It may be that the tube is like a magic wand, and that the 
moment it touches a matter aggregate a charge ap- 
pears. If this is true we ought not to insist upon knowing 
the wherefrom or nature of the charge, for that is not cus- 
tomary in fairyland. 

The tube itself must be in its real essence entirely dis- 
tinct from matter. The lines of force must not be thought 
of as a definite configuration of material particles, for such 
a conception would make the term superfluous. The lines 
should be considered as being spatial stress directions inde- 
pendent of the presence or absence of matter in the path 
of stress. Do the tube advocates remain content with this 
notion? We are told that tubes of force, in order to play 
their role properly, must be considered as being subjected 
to tension in a longitudinal direction, thus producing a 
decrease in the length of the tube. When the ends of the 
tube lie upon a body which is insulated, this contraction is 
considered as being impossible of accomplishment because 
the ends are so firmly fixed to the insulated body that with- 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 49 

drawal is impossible. A splendid mechanical model of 
this latter case, if this is desired — and it seems to be the 
sole purpose of the tube notion — can be constructed by 
using wire to represent the lines of force and hollow bodies 
for the charged bodies. If, then, the wires are riveted on 
the inside of these shell-like bodies, we have the case of 
tubes of force attached to insulated bodies. The fact is that 
some such notion must actually accompany this concept, for 
how can we otherwise conceive the permanency of the con- 
tact between tube end and insulated body? The difficulties 
involved in this latter hypothesis are trivial in comparison 
with the notion of a state of tension existing along the 
length of the tube. We can readily conceive of a state of 
tension existing along some particular line zn a material 
body, in which case science at once introduces the term 
"force," or some similar term, to account for the existence 
of this particular type of disturbance. Are we, then, not 
well within our rights if we demand that the tube advocates 
exhibit to us a secondary force as the real activity agent 
in this phenomenon of force tube tension? Thinking in 
these scientific terms, it would not be entirely inconceivable 
to imagine the case of a tube of force contracting under 
the influence of an external force influence, provided that 
we did not inquire how this phenomenon would be accom- 
plished. 

To remain a scientist and think that the tube of force 
could contract itself would be far more inconceivable. It 
would be far more consistent to refrain from materialistic 
particularization and be content with the notion of force as 
synonymous with a deiform mover which, when acting upon 
material groups, can cause them to approach each other or 
depart, depending upon the exigencies of the case. How- 
ever, this would not be a scientific attitude, for in science 
something always acts upon something else in accordance 
with the principle of conservation. It would be nothing 
less than scientific heresy to assume that a given something 
can act upon itself — indeed, must act upon itself — before 
it can produce effects upon things other than itself. Never- 
theless, the Thomsonian tube hypothesis does just this. In 
his desire to visualize this particular group of phenomena. 



50 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

Thomson requests us to pin our faith in the first place 
upon the tube's ability and willingness to contract ; then we 
are properly prepared to accept the second part of the per- 
formance, which pertains to a spatial change of position 
of the involved material groups. It may be that Thomson 
belongs to that school of physics which denies dealing with 
causes. If this is the case, the contraction of the tube would 
be designated as being the physical antecedent of the sub- 
sequent observable modifications in the matter groups. 

At one time it was considered sound reasoning to sup- 
pose that the earth was sustained by a large tortoise. This 
one in turn was supported by another and larger one, and 
so on ad infinitum — ^which means until you become weary 
of asking the same question over and over again and receiv- 
ing the same answer. Finally, when your patience is 
exhausted, the elephant is brought upon the scene and the 
last tortoise is then gently placed upon the back of this 
most adequate beast, whose ability to carry the burden of 
the proof must remain unquestioned. 

If, however, the Thomsonian tube is the first and only 
tortoise, then we can clearly understand why the occult 
power of self-contraction must be ascribed to it. This 
power alone is not a sufficient equipment for a well-behaved 
tube. It must be able to distinguish and discern between 
matter groups, it must be able to play a definite, consistent 
role in the scheme of things ; in fact, it must be a knowing, 
conscious organization, otherwise it may readily be con- 
ceived that, at some ill-chosen moment, the tube would fail 
to perform in a decorous manner, or cease its functioning 
entirely. 

Thomson, therefore, in finding it necessary to ascribe 
the function of self -contraction to the tube, has entered the 
sphere of "what force is." If that is metaphysics, then 
Thomson is a metaphysician. It may be retorted that 
Thomson is well within the bounds of the "what it does," 
for in his very assumption he merely maintains that the 
tube "does contract." A fine quibble, indeed! — for \Yhat 
can be meant scientifically by "what it does" except the dis- 
turbing influence of the "it" upon other things or "its" in 
a genuine objective world. Consequently, if the "it" does 
something to itself, then the scientist has ceased to deal with 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 51 

the cold, unconscioics factors of a material universe, and he 
has inadvertently hurled himself into the domain of the 
volitional and, at least, selective consciousness, 

37. The Erroneous Dualism of Science. 

The phenomenal world for Thomson is, then, dualistic 
in its final analysis. Phenomena are the products of the 
action of force upon matter. Mathematically considered, 
force is a compound unit involving the product of mass and 
acceleration. This mathematical definition can mean noth- 
ing if it does not mean that the magnitude of a "force" is 
measured by the accelerative effect which it exerts upon a 
given quantity of matter. Force, then, is an inferential 
causal factor in the phenomenal series. The overcoming of 
force through distance is known in physical science as 
"work," while the ability to perform work is classified 
under the category of "energy." 

We challenge the correctness of the dualistic position 
which regards force and matter as two distinct entities. 
We maintain that the only consistent position is the one 
which admits the identity of the two in a genuine monon, 
or force center. 

38. Matter and Force. 

This problem is not a product of modern science. It 
dates back to the earliest thought of which we have any 
records. The problem of matter and force has interested 
the human intellect from time immemorial. The early 
thinkers asked themselves the question. What is the nature 
of matter and what are the ultimate constituents of mate- 
rial things and objects? Observations of matter in motion, 
in contradistinction to matter at rest, led to the concepts 
of cause and effect. A causal principle was required to 
account for the change of state from rest to motion. Hence 
the invention of a second principle or entity called "force" 
by modern science. The more primitive notions were veiled 
in a mythological atmosphere. The manifestations of force 
or energy were regarded as the work of gods or demons. 
Systems of philosophy arose later dealing with the prob- 
lems of matter and force. Science and philosophy, physics 



52 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

and metaphysics, had not at that time parted ways. Science 
and philosophy were almost synonymous in content and pur- 
pose. The modern scientific method, involving a correlation 
and interpretation of experimental facts, was as yet 
unknown. 

39. Ancient Cosmic Theories. 

About 1200 B. C. the Phoenicians Sanchoniatho and 
Ochus evolved a materialistic conception of the universe. 
The Stoic Posidonius speaks of Ochus as the first originator 
and enunciator of an atomic theory of matter. The Chal- 
deans, Egyptians, Persians, and Chinese evolved cosmic 
theories abounding and veiled in fable and mythology. In 
India, many years before Christ, we find the Brahmins, 
Vedantists, and Buddhists discussing the nature and signifi- 
cance of matter. About 600 B. C, Thales, the Greek philoso- 
pher, reduced the world to an original element, water, from 
which all things emanated and everything was divine. He 
did not attempt to define his concept, but named it annpov. 
About the year 500 B. C, there flourished at Elea, in Italy, 
a school of thinkers who asserted that the world of things 
was one of appearance whose real nature could be ascer- 
tained only through understanding and reason. Xeno- 
phanes, the founder of this school, held that all things are 
eternal and immutable. To account for the multifarious 
changes in things, he assumes as primitive elements water 
and earth. Parmenides, also of the Eleatic School, distin- 
guished between apparent knowledge and true knowledge. 
Apparent knowledge came through the senses, while real 
knowledge resulted through reason. To account for the 
changes in the physical universe he introduced two prin- 
ciples, that of heat or light, a positive element, and that of 
cold or darkness, a negative element, or, as he preferred to 
style it, a limitation. In the philosophies of the East Indians 
we also find the concepts of affirmation and negation play- 
ing an important role. It remained for Hegel to round these 
thoughts into a comprehensive system. 

Heracleitus, a profound thinker of the Ionian School, 
also made it his object to discover an elemental principle 
which he assumed to be fire, because this was, for him, the 
most subtle and active of all the elements. Fire, he main- 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 53 

tained, was at the foundation of all things, and, conse- 
quently, it was the universal agent in change. According 
to Heracleitus, the universe was neither the work of gods 
nor of men, but consisted in this elemental fire, which con- 
tinually kept alive. The changes noted in things he 
attributed to fire, which caused formation as well as disso- 
lution. The important fact in the universe was this very 
transformation, change, or flux of things. Becoming, not 
being ; change, not static existence, was the essence of that 
which constitutes the reality of the universe. 

Leucippus, a contemporary of Parmenides, about 500 
B. C, announced an atomic theory of matter. The world, as 
seen by Leucippus, consisted of a countless number of 
imperceptibly small particles that differed only in form, 
position, and size. Leucippus called these particles drofiot, 
or atoms. To them he ascribed the power of self-motion. 
Whirls and vortices were formed by the coming together of 
these darting, moving particles. Thus entire worlds were 
formed. The nebular hypothesis of Kant, Laplace, and 
Swedenborg was, consequently, antedated by Leucippus by 
some 2,200 years. 

Democritus, the brilliant disciple of Leucippus, main- 
tained that inertia, or degree of mechanical movability, den- 
sity and hardness were properties of things. From the two 
fundamental concepts of matter and motion, Democritus 
built his world system. 

After the time of Democritus, very little, if any, advance 
was made in the theory of atomism until in the sixteenth 
century A. D., when the Italian Giordano Bruno connected 
his conception of the monad with that of the atom of 
Leucippus. 

It remained for Leibnitz, the inventor of the infinitesimal 
calculus and the originator of the conception of "vis viva," 
to perfect the notion of a force substance in his Monadology. 
The monad of Leibnitz is essentially a center of force. He 
sought the ground of the motion of bodies not in their 
extension and mass, but in their ability to do work. 

The brilliant Jesuit mathematician, physicist, and 
astronomer. Father Boscovich, with keen prophetic vision, 
developed the concept of the force center to its fullest excel- 
lence. In more recent times we find Ampere, Faraday, and 



54 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

Fechner advocating this same theory in certain phases of 
their thinking. 

40. Dalton's Atom. 

In the year 1803, Dalton, employing the modern scientific 
method, introduced the "Law of Multiple Proportions," 
thus giving a fixity and definite individuality to the atom. 
Avogardo, employing the scientific method, introduced into 
science a new term, the "molecule," in distinction from the 
term "atom." 

41. Kaufmann's Researches. 

The fixedness given to the notion of mass by the contri- 
butions of Dalton and Avogadro was forever shattered by 
the brilliant researches on Beta rays by Kaufmann (1902- 
1906) . Kaufmann showed that as the velocity of the Beta 
particles approached that of light, the mass of the particles 
approached an infinite magnitude. The common inference 
from this discovery is that an infinite force is necessary to 
give to a particle the velocity of light ; and, furthermore, the 
erroneous conclusion is that light cannot be a manifestation 
of material particles. 

42. The Two Alien Entities of Science. 

In its atomistic garb, matter assumed such dignity and 
importance that the notion became the father of the modern 
materialistic school of philosophy. Matter in motion, how- 
ever, as the paramount datum of experience, proved itself 
a difficult notion for science to solve. The idea of activity 
of matter contained a further notion of a factor unlike mat- 
ter yet operating in conjunction with matter, producing the 
phenomena of motion of matter in space. The primary 
experience datum has the semblance of a compound com- 
posed of a distinct and independent active factor and 
another separate entity whose nature is wholly passive. 
The term "energy" has been introduced by science in order 
to place an exact label upon the active factor. We find the 
term "force" used frequently in a synonymous sense to des- 
ignate the activity factor in the universe. The exact scien- 
tific definition of energy involves two factors, mass and the 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 55 

square of the velocity together with the constant V2J 
while force is defined as the product of mass and accelera- 
tion. The independent activity factor, whether it be called 
energy or force, is defined by physics in terms of the other 
independent and passive factor mass. Science by this very 
act admits the impossibility of isolating the two factors as 
independent existences, nevertheless, by universal consent 
they are so regarded. The Faraday tube of force, previously 
considered, is a definite example of how science clearly disso- 
ciates the two notions and regards them as distinct entities 
having equal claims upon reality. In order causally to 
account for physical phenomena, science introduces an infer- 
ential X, a conceptual something to bridge the glaring gaps 
in the physical series. Thus arose the dualistic theory of 
matter and force as the two separate entities from whose 
mutual action phenomena are produced. The task of 
science has been to arrange an act between these two enti- 
ties, perhaps alien and inimical in their real nature, upon 
the stage of phenomenal experience, with space, time, and 
causality as the scenery. The task has proved of herculean 
proportions, and a resort to a "psycho-physical" force com- 
posed of kinetic energy and intelligence cannot overcome 
the difficulties involved, even if such a term be given its 
broadest possible significance, if it be regarded as an entity 
or being independent of matter. 

This dualistic theory continually involves science in an 
unending chain of difficulties. Force must find its way from 
one group of matter to another ; it must make itself known 
from one material aggregate to another such aggregate. 
As a consequence of these difficulties and problems there 
arose the much mooted question whether forces can make 
themselves known at a distance without the intervention 
of a transmitting vehicle or medium, or whether force 
effects must have a medium through which they can travel 
from one group to another. 

43. The Unifying Principle. 

In the preceding chapter we have seen some of the inher- 
ent weaknesses of the materialistic position. The tube-of- 
force concept involves insurmountable incompatibilities. 
To make it operative at all, selective intelligence must be 



56 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

introduced into the notion. However, materialism refuses 
to countenance any conceptual content which involves some- 
thing other than mere mechanism. Nevertheless, "some- 
thing other than mere mechanism" must be introduced into 
the groundwork of the universe in order to explain physical 
action. Moreover, it is impossible to regard force and mat- 
ter as independent entities. Materialism has utterly failed 
to show us the moduis operandi by which interaction between 
those two alien entities may be established. A unifying 
concept is absolutely necessary in order to make physical 
action possible. Selective intelligence, which even the rabid 
materialist must include in all his concepts, involves the 
admission that reason and intelligence constitute the founda- 
tions of the cosmos. In the world of purely physical phe- 
nomena determinism governs activity. The physical uni- 
verse is, consequently, a world of secondary causes. There- 
fore, we do not countenance the idea held by some thinkers 
that selective intelligence involves conscious will. The phy- 
sical elementals of the universe give us no indication of the 
slightest trace of conscious life. Therefore we are forced 
to the conclusion that the imprint of deterministic character 
exhibited by the physical elementals is an endowment as- 
signed to them by the Creative Divine Intelligence. The 
deterministic characteristics of the primordial elementals 
are merely a part of those unified rational activity relations 
which we record as the physical story of a rational cosmos. 
Consequently this record is written in terms of natural laws. 
In the introductory chapter we have shown that the admis- 
sion that reason and intelligence are necessary for the expla- 
nation of physical phenomena involves the further admis- 
sion of the existence of a Creative Divine Intelligence. Fur- 
thermore, the concept of God furnishes us with the only 
unifying principle capable of accounting for the law- 
ordained interaction between primordial elementals which 
would be incapable of such intelligible interaction if they 
are regarded as the independent entities erroneously isolated 
by materialistic science. 



CHAPTER III 
Action at a Distance and the Ether Hypotheses 

44. Action at a Distance. 

Some two hundred and fifty years ago, the scientific 
world found it difficult to conceive the idea that matter can 
act where it is not. At that time the motions of the planets 
were explained by a mechanism of cycles and epicycles. 
This system was slightly improved by Descartes, the French 
philosopher and mathematician, by introducing the concep- 
tion of "vortices." At the time of its introduction to the 
scientific world, the Newtonian doctrine of gravitational 
attraction met with stubborn resistance. In a letter written 
by Voltaire in the year 1727 reference is made to this resist- 
ance. Voltaire, having just visited England, wrote: "A 
Frenchman who arrived in London finds a great alteration 
in philosophy, as in other things. He left the world full ; he 
finds it empty. At Paris you see the universe composed of 
vortices of subtile matter ; at London we see nothing of the 
kind. With you it is the pressure of the moon which causes 
the tides of the sea ; in England it is the sea which gravitates 
toward the moon. You will observe also that the sun, which 
in France has nothing to do with the business, here comes 
in for a quarter of it. Among you Cartesians all is done 
by impulsions ; with the Newtonians it is done by an attrac- 
tion of which we know the cause no better." 

The much mooted question of action at a distance dis- 
turbed the scientific world over two hundred years ago 
and divided it mto two camps. 

Stated concisely, the question is, Can matter act where 
it is not? Must discrete portions of matter be connected 
by an intermediate something, an X, a medium, plenum, 
or ether, by means of which one material system can be 
placed, as it were, en rapport with another distant material 
system? Daniel Bernoulli answered the former question 
in the affirmative and denied the necessity of a gravific 

57 



68 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

medium in a letter written in 1744 to the mathematical 
physicist Euler. Father Boscovich, in a work entitled "The- 
oria Philosophia Naturalis," published at Vienna in 1758, 
maintained with Daniel Bernoulli that action at a distance 
was possible through an absolute vacuum. For him matter 
consisted merely of force centers endowed with inertia, and 
all physical and chemical activities were explainable as 
mutual attractions and repulsions, varying in intensity with 
the magnitude of the intervening distance, 

45. The Medium of Faraday. 

Later the brilliant investigator, Faraday, combated 
the doctrine of Bernoulli and Boscovich and infused new 
life into the medium hypothesis by his researches into elec- 
trical and magnetic phenomena. In fairness to Faraday 
we must quote the following, in which he refers to the notion 
of a corporeally extended atom : "What do we know of the 
atom apart from its force? You imagine a nucleus which 
may be called a, and surround it by forces which may be 
called m; to my mind, the a, or nucleus, vanishes and the 
substance consists of the powers m. And, indeed, what 
notion can we form of the nucleus independent of its pow- 
ers? What thought remains on which to hang the imagi- 
nation of an a independent of the acknowledged forces?*' 
This is a most remarkable and clear statement of what 
everyone must admit is the true condition of our knowledge 
of corporeality. However, Faraday's difficulty consisted in 
arranging mutual action between these force centers. He 
therefore advocated the notion of a medium as the necessary 
link which could make possible mutual action between force 
centers. 

46. The Ether of Clerk-Maxwell and Hertz. 

The cause of the ether hypothesis was furthered by the 
mathematical investigations of Clerk-Maxwell and by the 
researches of Heinrich Hertz upon the velocity of propaga- 
tion of electro-magnetic effects. The conception of electro- 
magnetic propagation in the ether is due principally to the 
nineteenth-century school of physicists. 

The advent of the corpuscular or electronic theory of 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 59 

matter has cast doubt upon the efficacy of a plenum or 
ether hypothesis to explain the many new phenomena dis- 
covered in the domain of electrophysics and electro- 
chemistry. 

47. [The Field of Force and its Implications. 

The followers of Faraday and Clerk-Maxwell still con- 
tinue to deny the possibility of action at a distance and 
assert that electrostatic and magnetic attractions and repul- 
sion are due to the stress or pressure action of a field of 
force which surrounds charged or magnetized bodies. 

It is pertinent to ask the followers of Faraday what 
they mean by the term "field of force." Is it a reality in 
the external world, or is it merely a thought phantom con- 
jured into merely conceptual existence as a mathematical 
necessity? If we read about "field of force" in works on 
electricity and repeat the term a sufficient number of times, 
it becomes, after a while, a mental friend which assumes, 
perhaps, unwarranted proportions of reality. Add to this 
pictorial illustrations of "tubes of force" bedecked and 
adorned with mathematical symbols of exactness and final- 
ity, and we are brought face to face with a powerful 
Goliath able to crush out and extinguish those impulses of 
common sense which demand a counterpart in the physical 
world for the magic phantoms of a fertile mathematical 
imagination. 

Two possible answers present themseles to my mind 
like the horns of a dilemma. On the one hand, the followers 
of Faraday can maintain that by "field of force" they mean 
an active energized ether — whatever that is — or, on the 
other, they may hold that the term is merely a mathematical 
invention, a conceptual creation in the nature of a last 
resort when face to face with problems of ultimate reality. 
There are many who do not hesitate to label such conceptual 
creations as "metaphysical" plus a tinge of pity and scorn 
for the originator : a most curious attitude, in view of the 
fact that science itself is replete with metaphysical con- 
ceptions which pertain to hypothetical causal factors not 
known to sense perception. However, since "field of force" 
is a well-established scientific term possessed of a perfectly 
respectable ancestry, we are given to understand that we 



60 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

must be very careful lest we commit the unforgivable sin 
of assigning this term to the category of the metaphysical. 

Let us assume, then, that "field of force" is not a "meta- 
physical" will-o'-the-wisp changing with the physico-mathe- 
matical fashions, but that it is a genuine reality in the 
external world capable of performing the gyrations and 
contortions required of it by physical phenomena. An 
inquiry into the nature of this reality is then pertinent. 
Is "field of force" matter? Is it non-matter (shall we say 
spirit, soul, ultimate essence, absolute, or what not?) ; or 
is it a subtile something neither matter, as known to our 
senses, nor vacuum, meaning complete absence of matter? 
Shall we take the term at its face value, and suppose that 
the three-dimensional expanse of space is the sporting 
ground of forces which romp and prance about, at- 
taching themselves ever and anon to alien, uninterested 
particles of matter whose nature is antipodal to that of 
force ? 

If the field of force is composed of matter, then the 
nature of the stress exerted by it, which is assumed to be 
the cause of the attraction or repulsion, must be explained. 
In other words, the mechanism by which surrounding mat- 
ter causes stress or pressure to be exerted upon the sur- 
rounded matter must be shown. Even if this be possible, 
we are at a loss to know what advantage has been gained 
by substituting the term "stress" for that of attraction. 
It seems that one inexplicable term is of as little value as 
another, or even as any third which can be invented as a 
substitute for both. 

Suppose that we assume that the field of force is a sub- 
tile something, neither matter nor non-matter, but a plenum, 
medium, or ether. This assumption leads us to the consid- 
eration of the continuity or discontinuity of matter. If we 
maintain that matter exists continuously throughout space, 
and we still find need for an ether to perform activities un- 
assignable to matter, then we are forced to hold that ether 
and matter coexist in the same space. This thought, aside 
from being repugnant to sound reasoning, involves so many 
difficulties even for the ablest mathematician that very little 
can be expected from such an hypothesis. We must demand 
consistency from any hypothesis. If ether is a genuine 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 61 

something, not force, energy, spirit, or thought — in other 
words, a real substance differing in its nature from matter, 
yet actually existing in space, which involves occupancy of 
space — then ether and matter cannot coexist in space even 
if mathematical manipulation can find a way to surmount 
the other difficulties involved in this conception. It is folly 
to expect a physical counterpart for every imaginable mathe- 
matical expression. It is the part of wisdom to condense 
actual physical phenomena to the shorthand of mathematical 
expressions. 

48. Matter Regarded as Distinct from. Ether. 

The remaining alternative is that matter is discontinuous 
and that ether exists where matter is not. We must then 
assign one set of properties to matter and another set to 
ether. These properties must be capable of taking mutual 
cognizance of each other. The mechanism by which this 
cognizance becomes effectively operative must be set forth. 
Furthermore, we must assign to the ether some definite 
content if it is to be even a factor in thought. If it is not 
assumed to be some form of matter — make it as subtile, 
elusive, rare, and minute as you please — then it must be 
placed in some entirely different category from matter; 
in other words, if the ether is not some form of matter, it 
must be akin in its nature to force, energy, mind, or spirit, 
in which event we eliminate the spatial attribute entirely. 

49. Matter Regarded as Ether in Motion. The Theories of 
Euler, Helmholtz, and Kelvin. 

In order to obviate the difficulties encountered in both 
the above-mentioned suppositions, a radically different solu- 
tion has been put forth in recent years. This involves the 
notion that all is ether, that there is no such substance as 
matter distinct from and independent of the ether, and that 
the ether is an ideal incompressible fluid. Euler investigated 
mathematically the possibilities of motion in such an ideal 
fluid. He cared little, as many other mathematical physi- 
cists have done, whether the physical counterpart of his 
ideal fluid could be shown to exist. For him it was a 
thought-phantom, with which to play at the game of mathe- 



62 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

matics. Thought-phantoms oftentimes become genuine 
realities to the best-disciplined physicists if they happen to 
meet mathematical requirements. Von Helmholtz's consid- 
rations of the ideal fluid of Euler led him to propound the 
theorem that rotaton, once established in such an ideal fluid, 
is unending, while particles which do not rotate from the 
beginning can never be set in rotation. These doctrines in 
the hands of Lord Kelvin were developed into the theory of 
v^ortex atoms, which, according to Kelvin, are spinning 
gyrostatic elements of ether in the ether. 

50. Karl Pearson's Ether Hypothesis. 

Kelvin's theory, although a most ingenious mathematical 
creation, nevertheless involves the same insurmountable 
difficulties as are found in all the ether hypotheses. Karl 
Pearson has put forward another ether hypothesis differing 
from Kelvin's in the modus operandi of its atoms, but in 
complete accord with him in regarding matter as merely 
an ether disturbance in the ether. Karl Pearson, however, 
shows sound sense in disclaiming external reality for his 
thought creation, and he distinctly states that the ether is 
nothing more than a conceptual limit of our perceptual 
experience. 

51. The Inconsistent Content of the Ether Hypothesis. 
The ether is a thought creation intended to bridge the 

chasm between material bodies and particles and to make 
explicable the phenomena of the physical world. Primarily, 
then, it is a thought concept, an hypothesis of which we 
must demand self-consistency. All advocates of the ether 
hypothesis agree in maintaining that the ether is a per- 
fectly homogeneous fluid not made up of discrete parts like 
that other fluid, water, with which we are so familiar. 
When the discrete particles of water are set in motion a 
current or stream of these separate particles can be seen. 
How can a perfectly homogeneous fluid not composed of 
separate parts ever make manifest to the senses any changes, 
rotations, gyrations, or displacements taking place within 
it? The ether is a weightless something filling all space. 
It is isotropic, that is, it has the same properties in all direc- 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 63 

tions. It is incompressible. These properties are common 
to all ethers, and the brands are numerous. Differences of 
opinion exist, however, in regard to the other properties of 
the ether. Maxwell gives the following values : 

Density of the ether= 106x10— 2 | ( water = unity). 
Modulus of rigidity (in C.G.S. units) =955. 
Modulus of rigidity of glass in the same units =24x10^-11. 
Density of the ether = ,,<y^^^^^,^i^^,-5^^^,-^^^ (air=unity). 
Rigidity = ^4^,-^i^,-^^^ (glass = unity). 

These corrected Maxwellian values assume the amplitude of 
an ether-wave as J-. of its wave length. It is equally cor- 
rect and admissible to assume the amplitude as yq^qoo ®^ 
its wave length. For this supposition the density of the 

ether becomes f;ooo:oWooo ^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ rigidity equals -^^ 
of glass. The enormous inconsistencies of the hypothesis 
make it unnecessary to split hairs in regard to the decimal 
places in the above values. As a medium of excitation of 
mathematical imagination the ether stands without a peer 
in the history of physical science. 

If the density ascribed to the ether is either of the above 
values, it must be the rarest of all gases. A gas of such 
rarity cannot be imagined with discrete parts separated by 
great distances. This conclusion contradicts the assumption 
that the ether is continuous throughout space. Moreover, 
it vitiates the hypothesis of incompressibility. In the face 
of these facts, Maxwell did not hesitate still further to 
torture the ether in order to force it to account for gravita- 
tion. Consequently he assumed that it was able to withstand 
a pressure of 37,000 tons per square inch in a vertical 
direction and a tension of the same amount in a horizontal 
direction. When we compare this with the rigidity of high 
carbon steel having an ultimate strength of 50 tons per 
square inch, we wonder how it is possible for bodies to move 
about in this all-pervading ether with such consummate 
ease. Physico-mathematics does not always trouble itself 
with the demands of common sense. It is known that the 
planets and the atoms move through space with a freedom 
which forces us to assume that it is absolutely empty. 



64 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



52. A Critical Analysis of the Ether Hypotheses. 

Hertz has clearly set forth the requirements of the 
ether in order that it shall be capable of explaining the phe- 
nomena of electromagnetics. An impartial common-sense 
examination of the Hertzian disquisition in regard to the 
propagation of electric disturbance in the ether cannot result 
in anything but a verdict against the ether as a rational 
hypothesis for the explanation of these phenomena. 

Hypothesis I, Case I 

A logical analysis of the possible conceptions concerning 
the nature of the ether brings before us two distinct 
hypotheses. 

The first hypothesis considers the electrical disturbance 
as being due to the combined action of two distinct fac- 
tors — a medium and the effect of action at a distance. 

The basic postulate is that space is nowhere empty, but 
is filled with a mysterious substance or something called 
ether. Under the first hypothesis we find two related cases. 

First Factor, Action at a distance considered as the 
large factor. 

Second Factor, Effect in ether regarded as the small 
factor. 

Assumptions 
It is assumed that the acting force produces a change, 
called polarization, in the smallest parts of the medium. In 
Fig. 1 we show diagrammatically the conditions supposed 



Ether 



Dizieiiii] 




3 



iMgurc 1 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 65 

to obtain in Case I. In this diagram, A and B represent two 
oppositely charged bodies. The intervening space is the 
particular abiding-place of the ether. The small rectangles 
represent ether particles. The fact that a different state 
or condition exists at the opposite extremities of these ether 
particles is indicated by a cross-sectioned surface and a full 
black surface. The space C shows the existing conditions 
when a portion of the ether is removed in the space between 
the bodies A and B. The positive and negative electricitis 
are shown upon the two bodies A and B by the same conven- 
tional method used to indicate the opposite states of polari- 
zation in the ether particles. The force exerted between the 
two bodies is indicated by arrows. The ether or electric 
fluid between A and B is regarded as an absolutely continu- 
ous isotropic substance. It is supposed that if a portion C 
of the ether is removed the forces within the space C remain 
unchanged, but the phenomenon of polarization disappears 
with the removal of the ether. 

Implications 
Every ether hypothesis insists upon the fact that the 
ether is a continuum. Indeed, this is its principal function 
and purpose in physical science. In other words, the ether 
fills space. Consequently human intelligence can readily 
subdivide the ether into continuum areas of the most minute 
dimensions. A vacuous space can be similarly divided by 
the imagination. However, we need not expect more of the 
little imaginary ether areas than we expect of the vacuum 
areas. The little ether areas will not show animal propensi- 
ties, they will not perform, they will not become individuals, 
they will not polarize just because the human imagination 
has created them. Human imagination does not create life, 
it does not cause genuine entities possessing well-defined 
properties and functions to come into being. If the ether 
is a continuum, it will always remain a continuum. If it 
is a discontinuum, then it is a form of matter, however 
subtile and refined, and it is then composed of genuine dis- 
parate physical parts. If it is still maintained that distinct 
and individualized parts do exist in this continuum, then the 
ether advocate must not keep us in total darkness in regard 
to the nature of that choice which determines the physical 



66 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

magnitude of these ether spaces. Does the ether, by the use 
of intelligent volition, determine the precise boundaries to 
its own little subdivisions? Are the physical dimensions 
equal or unequal? Is the process one of blind chance, or 
do the bodies A and B play a part in the unique drama? 
Moreover, we are not content with the mere term "polariza- 
tion" as an explanation of a condition or state supposed to 
come into existence upon these subdivisions if such parts 
actually exist at all. The very vagueness of the term may 
be the satisfying element to some, but it should not be 
acceptable to the scientist who prides himself upon the won- 
derful mathematical accuracy of all his intellectual inven- 
tions. If "poralization" means anything at all more than 
a convenient highly unscientific artifice, it must mean that 
two antipodal conditions exist upon diametrically opposite 
portions of the little subdivisions. Of the infinite number 
of possible diameters, which one will prove to be the favored 
and the chosen? Does the imaginary subdivision do its 
own selecting of such a diameter? Perhaps the ether as a 
whole directs the maneuver. Possibly the body A or the 
body B, or both, or something entirely outside of the system, 
exerts its potent intelligent will telepathically in this mys- 
terious selection. All these conjectures may be fatuous 
errors. An unseen, seen, heard, or unheard of force may 
be the directing and guiding influence in this ethereal phe- 
nomenon. By what mechanism, may we ask, does this force 
produce changes in the ether particles? Our inquisition is 
not complete unless we insist upon being informed in regard 
to the precise nature of the two antipodal conditions created 
in this homogeneous isotropic plenum. Is one condition 
compression and the other tension ? Has the ether substance 
undergone a change in its very nature so that the antipodals 
are structural opposites? Do the diametrically opposite 
ends vibrate at different rates ? It may be that a something 
has attached itself to one end, and an entirely different 
something has simultaneously affixed itself to the other end. 
Why not assume, in order to simplify the problem, that a 
state of joy exists at one end and a state of sorrow holds 
forth at the other? From the standpoint of aesthetics it 
may prove more impressionistic to suppose that one end is 
white and the other black. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



67 



It may be said that we are entirely too severe in our 
innuendoes. Drastic measures, however, are required to 
subdue that spirit of intolerance in science which prohibits, 
either by ridicule or by willful disregard, the open, unbiased 
discussion of the validity of the basic concepts which form 
the very foundation-stones of science. The utter careless- 
ness with which modern science creates new convenience 
concepts, without in any way relating them to a real world 
and without any semblance of exactitude and consistency 
in the content of such concepts, is certainly deplorable. 
Intrenched within the fortress of experimental investiga- 
tion, the scientific method can defy the attacks of supersti- 
tion and emotional traditions. Nevertheless, a consistent 
science, a progressive science, a science of the future, if it is 
to employ in its edifice concepts which bring it into imme- 
diate rapport with the living, conscious world order, must 
not ignore the logic of philosophy and metaphysics in any 
attempt to construct a consistent cosmic system. 

53. Hypothesis I, Case II 

First Factor, Action at a distance considered as the 
small factor. 

Second Factor, Effect in ether regarded as the large 
factor. This case is shown pictorially in Fig. 2. 



Ether 




/Vo l^olarlzatton . 
Forces Sxist 

hut smaii. 



Figure 2 



68 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

Assumptions 

For this case the action at a distance effect is considered 
as merely a nominal factor. The charges on the bodies A 
and B exist, but they are small. It is assumed that the elec- 
tricity of the medium is displaced toward the action at a 
distance effect, thus neutralizing this latter effect to a great 
extent. It is, moreover, supposed that the medium exerts a 
pressure on account of the attraction of its internal electri- 
fications, which, in turn, tends to draw the bodies A and B 
together. The forces are still imagined to exist in the empty 
space C, although they are considered as vanishingly small. 
As in Case I, no polarization is assumed in the empty space 
C. Helmholtz developed this view for the entire field of elec- 
tro-magnetic phenomena. Poisson employed it for the stat- 
ical phenomena in magnetism, while Mosotti found it useful 
in the explanation of electrical phenomena. 

Implications 

What real, definite meaning shall we place upon this 
conglomerate mass of words? It all sounds very technical, 
abstruse, and therefore very sane. Indeed, we are upon 
holy ground and should have some reverence for such glo- 
rious and profound words as "electricity of the medium," 
"neutralization," "internal electrifications." Such wonder- 
ful words ought to possess sufficient inherent power to drag 
any two bodies together, no matter what distance or ob- 
stacles may intervene. 

What genuine, clearly defined concept shall we affix to 
the combination of words "electricity of the medium"? 
While our attention has been distracted, our friend the 
scientific prestidigitator has produced, as if from nowhere, 
another "convenience unknown" with which to bewilder our 
reasoning faculties. Is the "electricity of the medium" a 
new entity distinct from the ether? If so, is it a fluid, is it 
of a material nature, is it force, energy, spirit, demon, or 
just an ordinary scientific term? Whatever it is, how does 
it attach itself to, and operate in or upon, ^he medium? 
Does it affect or change the medium in any manner what- 
soever; and if so, in what manner? This electricity, this 
soniething, is assumed to be so related to the medium that 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 69 

it can be displaced toward the action at a distance effect. 
At this point in the argument the scientific magician pro- 
duces from his resourceful sleeve another entity to which 
he gives the name "action at a distance effect." An "effect" 
ordinarily means a result or consequence manifest in a 
change of state or condition of things. Therefore, in the 
generally accepted meaning of the term, an effect certainly 
is not a thing. However, if an effect is not a thing, how can 
we comprehend the supposed displacement of the electricity 
of the medium toward this effect? Moreover, this "thing 
effect" must have a definite spatial position, otherwise how 
can we understand the displacement of another something 
"toward" it? Furthermore, the "electricity of the medium" 
must itself be a thing if human intelligence is requested even 
to imagine its displacement. Assuming, then, that elec- 
tricity is a thing, how and by what agency is it propelled 
through the ether? Does it pass over the ether particles 
as a ring may pass along a wire? Does it force the ether 
particles to open a free path for it along the line of its 
motion? What determines the direction of the motion? 
When it reaches its goal the "thing effect," how does it 
neutralize to a great extent this "thing effect"? Does a 
battle ensue between the "thing effect" and electricity, after 
which, and when the smoke has cleared, we look in vain for 
the greater portion of the "thing effect"? Does the greater 
portion of the "thing effect" go up in smoke? In the face 
of all these unanswered questions, we are confronted by 
the statement that the pressure which the medium exerts 
on account of the attraction of its internal electrifications 
tends to draw the bodies together. A moment ago we 
beheld the spectacle of the electricity of the medium being 
displaced toward the action at a distance effect. Now we 
find the electrifications performing another role entirely. 
The internal electricities are now acting like so many affini- 
ties under the spell of each other's mutual attraction. We 
infer that we are requested to complete the picture by con- 
ceiving the next tableau as revealing the electricities in 
closer proximity to each other. As a consequence of this 
action of the electricities, we are told that a "pressure" 
arises in the medium. "Pressure" ? Is that a new term, or 
is it a condition? Is it intended by this new term that we 



70 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

shall conceive a condition of "compression" as arising in 
the medium ? Shall we think of the ether particles as being 
urged into a smaller space by the similar behavior of the 
electricities? How shall we reconcile this with the incom- 
pressibility of the ether? Will a vacuum arise in the rear 
and front of the compression zone? If so, what about the 
ether as an all-pervading continuum? If extraneous ether 
particles rush in to fill the gap, what real significance can 
then be assigned to the phenomena of compression? The 
two bodies A and B in this latter event will have no induce- 
ment to motion. If this mere phenomenon of compression 
is a sufficient inducement to such motion, how can the bodies 
move with these extraneous particles of ether in their path 
of progress ? If a vacuum is produced in the rear and front 
of the compression zone, how is the fact that a state of com- 
pression exists in this zone to be made known across a 
vacuum? Assuming that the opposite electrifications are 
displaced toward the action at a distance effect whose nativ- 
ity seems to be the bodies A and B, and supposing that 
these opposite electrifications are things, is it not then rea- 
sonable to suppose that A and B will be moved farther 
apart? The fact is that with opposite electricities upon A 
and B, the bodies tend to approach each other. 

Despite all these pertinent and unanswered inquiries, 
the ether advocate shows his persistent bias for his favorite 
creature by charging us with a total misunderstanding of 
the wonderful real relation which exists between ether and 
matter. We are consequently informed most emphatically 
that the ether permeates matter as water does a sponge — 
only more so, of course. Moreover, we are instructed to 
conceive the body A as a hollow ring, whether the poor thing 
A can obey this mandate or not; similarly our omnipotent 
intellect transforms body B into a ring with its inevitable 
hollow. Now intellectually mold the ether into a cylinder 
of suitable size to allow the rings A and B to be passed over 
it. Then when compression sets in within the ether cylinder 
the bodies A and B simply must move toward each other. 
Something must happen, and the two bodies A and B cer- 
tainly are not going to upset all respectable traditions and 
move away from each other. If the bodies A and B are to be 
affected at all by the state of compression in the ether cylin- 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 71 

der, a definite causal interaction between the cylinder and 
the two bodies must be clearly established. 

The mere fact that the two material rings A and B are 
so arranged upon the cylinder that they can slide upon it is 
not a sufficient reason for the assumption that such a sliding 
motion will be initiated. Moreover, an axial contraction or 
expansion of the cylinder is not a sufficient cause for a dis- 
placement of the bodies. It is readily seen that the cylin- 
drical model can be sufficiently modified to fulfil the require- 
ments imposed by those who emphasize the peculiar impor- 
tance of the alleged ability of the ether to permeate and 
invade all intra-molecular spaces. Such an extension of the 
idea in no way affects the crucial point in the argument, 
which pertains to the omission of that fundamental relation 
of rapport which must exist between the ether cylinder, no 
matter how complex the model is made, and matter, if the 
latter is to be cognizant of any modifications within the 
ether. Even the entire removal of the ether section between 
A and B cannot disturb the peaceful slumbers of these two 
material bodies. 

Hypothesis II 

First Factor. Action at a distance considered as non- 
existent. 

Second Factor, Entire effect regarded as existing in the 
ether. 

Assumptions 

In Cases I and II of the first hypothesis, the nature of 
polarization, represented in the space between bodies A 
and B in Figures 1 and 2, depends upon the interpretation 
placed upon the term "electricity." 

In the second hypothesis the symbolic, graphical repre- 
sentation is intended to define the nature of an electric 
charge by means of the state of polarization in the medium. 
The particles of the dielectric are considered as charged 
with opposite electricities. No action at a distance factor 
is depicted upon bodies A and B. The phenomenon is sup- 
posed to be due entirely to the activities of the medium. In a 
space C devoid of the medium neither forces nor polarization 



72 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



are considered to exist. The relations are shown graphically 
in Figure 3. This conception of the ether is due principally 



Ether 






WtNaFolarizQiion, 

I c 

\No Forces « 

Figure 3 

to Clerk-Maxwell, who desired to avoid distance forces com- 
pletely. 

Implications 
The bodies A and B are regarded as contributing nothing 
to the electric disturbance observed. If a change of state 
in the system is observed, we have at least the right to ask 
for a physical antecedent in the event that the term "cause" 
is deemed objectionable. Since bodies A and B are not 
included in the series as factors influencing a change of state 
in the system, it can make no difference in the condition of 
the system if a charge exists upon the bodies, or if the notion 
of a charge is entirely eliminated from consideration. The 
fundamental assumption is that the conditions existing in 
the ether are independent of the states existing upon the 
bodies A and B. Nevertheless, observable physical phe- 
nomena always involve material aggregates, in the absence 
of which physical manifestations become impossible for 
observation. It is the very presence of a charged body 
that constitutes the physical antecedent of any change in 
condition or state which may be assumed to originate in the 
intervening or surrounding space. Without the existence 
of this charged body, the entire phenomenon becomes noth- 
ing but a dream of an over-ardent mathematician. If the 
charged body does not exist or perform some modifying 
function in the system, the ether space must remain a blank. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 73 

The introduction of a charged body into the system, never- 
theless, is known to produce a change of state in the system. 
This change of state may not be a new condition in the ether, 
but it is a genuine modification of some sort, because actual 
observations testify to such a change. Consequently if the 
ether is to have any more real significance than empty 
space, we must assume that the condition existing upon 
the charged body is in some manner transmitted to the 
ether. The advocates of this latter hypothesis, no doubt, 
find considerable solace in the fact that the ether is assumed 
to be so intimately interwoven with, or contiguous to, the 
material aggregate that no empty spaces intervene to frus- 
trate or hinder action or transmitted action in the system. 
The modern physicist fears empty space as persistently as 
a mouse fears a cat. Spatial contact is the "open sesame'* 
of science. Through the magic of this relation science hopes 
to give plausibility to many of its hypotheses. Close scrutiny 
of the notion reveals the injection into it of an activity 
principle of a causal nature, capable of producing real 
changes and modifications in relations previously existing. 
Spatial contact becomes an activity factor in the system. 
It brings about the transmission of an influence from a 
group a to another physical group 6. Without spatial con- 
tact, the scientist believes the transmission to be impossible. 
Consequently, contact is the factor which initiates the phe- 
nomenon of transmission. Therefore it must be regarded 
as an activity factor even if this inference is objectionable 
to science. Nevertheless, it is just as difficult to understand 
how an influence can be transmitted from a to 6 if spatial 
contact obtains as it is to conceive this transmission if a 
vacuum intervenes. If group a is alien to group h, spatial 
contact during eons of time will not cause or produce a 
change in the relation of a to b. Spatial contact is merely 
an incident of physical interaction. It may be an inevitable 
incident, nevertheless it is not an active factor in the inter- 
action. It "does nothing," but it is a visible relation brought 
about when some actual change has taken place in the sys- 
tem. The idea of action at a distance is, therefore, just as 
conceivable as transmitted action by means of spatial con- 
tact. Neither of these notions is tenable unless we modify 
our entire conception of physical action. This part of our 



74 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

discussion will be considered in more detail hereafter. For 
the present we must content ourselves with the statement, 
which will be more fully proved later in the discussion, that 
spatial contact is not an adequate bridge between matter 
and ether. It is evident that this statement obtains also 
for matter aggregates. If a charge exists upon a body, then 
mere spatial contact with the ether will not cause the 
medium to become cognizant of this fact. Moreover, we 
maintain that the condition of the body is a factor which 
cannot be ignored in a consistent interpretation of subse- 
quent events. The attempt of Maxwell to avoid the diffi- 
culties of the action at a distance hypothesis has only re- 
sulted in new difficulties of just as serious nature. If the 
reader entertains any doubt that we have presented the 
modern ether hypothesis in a true and consistent manner, 
we refer him to the classic memoir of Heinrich Hertz. 

54. Campbeirs Criticism of the Ether. 

In closing this portion of our critical analysis of the 
concepts of science, we shall quote the following from Nor- 
man R. Campbeirs work "Modern Electrical Theory." "The 
dictionary may be searched in vain for a word which has 
given rise to more confusions and misunderstandings; the 
amazing pronouncements about the 'aether' which have been 
made by many philosophers are rivalled by the statements 
which are to be found in the writings of men of science of 
the highest repute. There seems to be a strange attractive- 
ness about the word ; a student never feels so important as 
when he is about to introduce it into his examination papers, 
it is to be found in monographs on the geometrical fourth 
dimension and in treatises on the more obscure issues of 
theology. . . . Because a name has been given to the 
conception of the 'sether,' it has been assumed straightway 
that the aether is a substance, separate from the material 
bodies of the system and moving independently of them: 
for no other reason than the existence of the name it has 
been assumed that this aether has mass, elasticity, even 
weight: qualities which are only known to be associated 
with material bodies have been attributed to it, one after 
the other, until Mendeleef suggested that it is a chemical 
element with a place in the periodic series." 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 75 

55. McDougalFs Mentiferous Ether. 

It is indeed gratifying to note that Campbell advocates, 
in the above-cited work, the abandonment of the ether 
hypothesis. It is a regrettable fact, however, that Campbell, 
apparently, adopts the Thomsonian tube of force as a sub- 
stitute for the ether which he abandons. In thus seizing 
another inexplicable convenience unknown, he forcibly illus- 
trates how difficult it is for a man of science to arrive at a 
consistent philosophical conception of the universe. As a 
scientific talisman the ether, nevertheless, remains supreme 
in the annals of science. 

It is a lamentable fact that Professor McDougall has 
added another ether to the mutitudinous clan. He calls 
his new "creation" the "mentiferous ether." It is the very 
latest thing in ethers. This mentiferous ether is a psychic 
ether and as such it is a revelation in ultra-fashionable ether 
styles. He gives "weight" to the concept by designating it 
as an imponderable substratum. The states of conscious- 
ness have always proved to be an irresponsible contingent, 
difficult to hold together. As a psychical glue, the manufac- 
turer claims marvels for his mentiferous ether. Its adhesive 
properties are so wonderful that one state, through its use, 
readily recognizes another state and converses with it, in 
addition to the fact that it is forced to acknowledge itself 
as a dweller in the same spiritual soul house with other con- 
scious states, all of which are owned by the same spiritual 
proprietor. The preceding considerations are sufficient to 
dispose of this latest scientific phantom. 

56. Physical Action at a Distance. Coulomb's Hypothesis. 
Having disposed of the tube of force and the ether as 

inconsistent and rationally impossible hypotheses, we shall 
now lend our attention to the analysis of the physical action 
at a distance phenomenon. 

First Hypothesis Coulomb's 

Assumptions 
If a body A (Fig 4) exists alone, then there is no action 
at a distance exerted. The appearance of force presupposes 



76 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

the presence of at least two bodies (Fig. 5). The nature 
of this force may be one of attraction or repulsion, as in- 
dicated in Fig. 5. This view of action at a distance was 
entertained by Coulomb. 






Attraction or Repulsion 
Figure 4 Figure 5 

It is not our intention to discuss the most vital difficulties 
involved in this or in the second hypothesis under this cap- 
tion, for the reason that due consideration will be given to 
the matter later, when we analyze the problem of physical 
action in general. Here we merely wish to call attention to 
the principal views which have appeared in regard to dis- 
tance action. The implications which we shall consider will 
be only those which are at once apparent. 

Implications 

It is clear that Coulomb's hypothesis involves a dualism 
of matter and force. The inherent difficulties of this posi- 
tion have been pointed out in part in the above. It is 
assumed that when the body A exists alone no action is 
exerted and force does not make itself manifest. The 
instant, however, that a second body B is introduced, then 
the force appears and the activity appears as either attrac- 
tion or repulsion. It may be impertinent to ask whence does 
the force proceed to the bodies ? How does it make its pres- 
ence known ? Does it subdivide itself in any particular man- 
ner ; and, if so, what governs the relative amount of the sub- 
divisions? Do the subdivisions attach themselves to the 
bodies A and Bl What mechanism is used in effecting this 
attachment? How are the relative amounts that go to A 
and B determined? Shall we assume that the force exists 
not upon the bodies A and B, but between them? If the 
latter be true, how does the force make its desires effectively 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



77 



felt in or on A and B ? What determines the choice of attrac- 
tion or repulsion as the final result of the interview between 
matter and force ? 

The enunciator of this hypothesis has not deviated from 
the customary course pursued by men of science, and conse- 
quently he has simply ignored these questions, if they ever 
occurred to him. All that seems necessary for the produc- 
tion of a scientific hypothesis of this kind is to write names 
like force, bodies, attractions, repulsions, and action at a 
distance upon pieces of paper, throw them together in a 
hat, and then you can observe the genesis of a scientific 
hypothesis. When we deal with the problem of physical 
action we shall point out difficulties which inhere in all 
these hypotheses. 

Second Hypothesis 



i 



Assumptions 
This hypothesis supposes that every individual body sends 
out strivings throughout space. The single body A, shown 

in Fig 6, radiates 
these hopes and de- 
sires in all direc- 
tions into every im- 
aginable point of 
space. The observer 
does not become cog- 
nizant of these long- 
— ings of the body A 
until a second body 
B is introduced into 
the scenario. Then 
the action of the 
drama begins, and 
something happens 
to which mathemat- 
ics can be applied. 



\ 


/ 


x^ 


) > 


/ 


\ 



t 



Figure 6 

Implications 
If things are regarded as independent and unrelated, 
then the assumptions of the second hypothesis are of no 



78 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

avail in establishing action, whether the action be consid- 
ered as taking place across a void or through a medium. If 
the strivings radiated by the body A are to produce an effect 
or a change in the condition of body B, then body B must, 
as it were, understand the language of body A. In the phy- 
sical universe an "understanding" is impossible between 
bodies unless interaction in a unitary system is admitted. 
Moreover, a possible "understanding" is not conceivable 
in the physical world unless the cosmic relations are 
grounded in a Reality capable of creating a rational inter- 
acting unitary world order. The ordered responsive rela- 
tions between things in this unitary cosmic system are due, 
then, to an omniscient act of God. The cosmic symphony 
is God's composition and its harmonious phrasing of inter- 
action is due to His Divine Intelligence. The "understand- 
ing" between things is that God-given endowment which we 
perceive as those intelligible rational relations which we call 
the laws of nature's interaction. 

57. Interaction According to Boscovich. 

We believe that a broad interpretation of the views held 
by Father Boscovich, and enunciated by him in 1750, include 
interaction between his force centers regarded as a unitary 
system. Father Boscovich realized fully that action at a 
distance is involved in all physical phenomena. He showed 
profound insight in his unification of force and matter in 
the concept of the force center. His contention that these 
force centers exhibit their mutual dependence in mutual 
attractions and repulsions indicates that he realized the futil- 
ity of the notion that the centers are independent. Accord- 
ing to Boscovich the force center is endowed with inertia. 
We may think of the inertia as resistivity to a change in the 
condition of motion. Since a condition of absolute rest or 
zero motion is unknown in the physical universe, we pro- 
vide in the Space-Time Potential for this resistivity in our 
gyrational groups of force centers. The basic concepts of 
the Space-Time Potential are modern developments of the 
prophetic insight of Father Boscovich. 

In the following we shall present the fundamental facts 
underlying physical action. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 79 

58. The Basic Elements of the Space-Time Potential. 

The following principles constitute the .fundamental 
truths which serve as the foundation upon which the purely- 
physical assumptions rest: 

1. The existence of God. 

2. All reality owes its existence and maintenance to God. 

3. The immanence of God throughout the universe, and 
also His transcendence. 

4. The cosmos is a unitary, interacting, rational, pur- 
posive, and teleological system. 

Auxiliary Principles 

1. Matter is composed of cosmic activity centers mani- 
fest in space and time appearing in accordance with the law 
of causation. Matter owes its existence to a creative act of 
God. 

2. Action at a distance is presupposed in all physical 
action. 

3. Independent and distinct force entities do not exist 
apart from matter. Kaufmann's researches bear out this 
contention. 

5. The continuance of cosmic activity involves the main- 
tenance of an ultimate potential difference. God only is 
capable of maintaining this ultimate potential difference. 

The cosmic energy owes its existence to a creative act 
of God. The maintenance of that ultimate potential differ- 
ence which guarantees the continued operation of the cosmic 
machinery is due to the immanence of God, who is also 
transcendent. The Divine Intelligence is not only immanent 
in the universe, but His Being is also transcendent. 

59. Fundamental Concepts. 

In order to measure and record the magnitude of phy- 
sical change it is necessary arbitrarily to differentiate phe- 
nomenal action into particularized groups. This involves 
the arbitrary separation of a given phenomenon into phases 
interpretable in terms of arbitrary concepts capable of 
mathematical representation. Unity is consequently differ- 
entiated into multiplicity, which has no significance other 
than an arbitrary and necessary convenience. These arbi- 



80 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

trary conceptual artifices do not thereby achieve existence 
as independent physical realities. Therefore there ensues 
a complete relativity of those basic arbitrary concepts which 
constitute the alphabet of the language of science. This very 
relativity of meaning constitutes the closed chain of the 
conceptual edifice of science. This inherent relativity forces 
us to pass beyond the closed chain if v^e wish to arrive at a 
real understanding of physical phenomena. Within the 
closed chain no genuine explanation of physical change is 
possible. Every explanation within the closed chain is 
merely relative. One fragmentary action is explained in 
terms of some other fragmentary action. One concept 
involves another, and so on for ever and ever around the 
circle of concepts. No single concept is independently 
defined. By remaining within the closed conceptual chain 
we cannot arrive at an independent principle capable of 
explaining physical phenomena. Thus we are forced out- 
side of the closed chain to the concept of God as the only 
concept which can account for physical action. 

The complete relativity is another proof of the complete- 
ness of the world within itself. It is a proof that the world 
is a unitary interacting system. It is a proof that the world 
is a created completeness created by a Being distinct from 
any form observed within the system. The entire structure 
of science, therefore, becomes a proof of the existence of God 
the Creator. Science would not be possible without concepts, 
but a colossal error is committed when science ascribes more 
than relative significance to these concepts. Science ex- 
tracts and isolates concepts from a unitary reality; then 
these mere products of thought are endowed by science with 
physical reality. A physical model constructed from such 
concepts must always remain inoperative ; the parts of the 
machinery may be properly designed, but the motive power 
is missing. A pure mechanistic theory of the universe is 
impossible. 

The Space-Time Potential interprets the physical world 
by means of relative concepts. Its physical model is merely 
a tentative design devised for the sole purpose of rendering 
the cosmic machine more intelligible and assisting in the 
further and more perfect elaboration of the design. The 
source of the primal motion of the cosmic machine cannot 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 81 

be found in any of its members nor in any of its relative 
concepts. No physical machine is operated by self -generated 
power. Stevinus, in his work "Hypomnemata Mathematica" 
(1605), proved by means of a closed chain and the inclined 
plane over which it was suspended that perpetual motion is 
impossible. The cosmic machine is no exception to this 
scientific proof. Scientists would like well enough to make 
just one exception in favor of the cosmic machine. Such 
an exception would make all their work of no value. Con- 
sequently primal motion is due to an agency outside of the 
cosmic machine. Since the relativity of this agency pertains 
to the whole cosmic machine and is not involved as a part 
thereof, such an agency is efficacious in originating primal 
motion. The concept of God satisfies this demand. 

60. The Relative Physical Concepts of the Space-Time 

Potential. 
The relative physical concepts of the Space-Time Poten- 
tial contain no activity principle capable of accounting for 
physical phenomena. This activity principle is found in 
the existence of God. The relative concepts are epitomized 
relative phases of genuine physical action. They are only 
of relative value in describing phases of phenomenal action 
whose ultimate significance cannot be defined in physical 
terms. 

61. General Relativities. 

Matter and Action 
Matter is known only through physical action. 
Physical action always involves matter. 

Action and Reaction 
To every action there is opposed an equal reaction. 
Consequently every physical action involves two mate- 
rial systems : 

1. The Excitant System. 

2. The Concurrent System. 

The Excitant System is that system which we arbitrarily 
select as the initiatory system in the causal nexus. The 
Concurrent System is that system which responds to the 



82 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

initiatory system in accordance with the law of equality 
between action and reaction. Both systems are material 
systems. The Concurrent Material System may in certain 
class phenomena play the part of a medium. The Concur- 
rent System, when regarded as a medium, does not thereby 
become an Ether, because the Ether is not a material 
system. On the contrary, the Concurrent System, being 
matter, possesses all the properties of matter, and its con- 
tent contains none of the inconsistencies of an ultra-material 
ether. 

Motion 

The concept of motion involves : 

1. A center or body which moves. 

2. Another center or body in respect to which it moves. 

3. A distance traversed. 

4. A time interval consumed in the displacement. 
Motion may be described as being : 

1. Rectilinear. 

2. Curvilinear. 

3. Combinational, involving rectilinear and curvilinear 
displacement. 

62. Primary Relativity Concepts. 

Action Phase 

Physical action always means interaction. The systems 
involved in interaction exhibit interdependent physical 
changes. For the purpose of analysis we arbitrarily differ- 
entiate physical change Or action into such convenient con- 
ceptual types as mass, velocity, acceleration, force, torque, 
kinetic reaction, impulse, work, energy, electric charge, 
attraction, repulsion, equilibrium, etc. To these conceptual 
types of physical change we given the name action phases. 
The actual physical change involves many action phases. 
Action, then, is a continuous characteristic physical unity 
which involves a multiplicity of action phases. These action 
phases have no independent reality. They are not indepen- 
dent physical entities. The action phases are convenient 
analytical segregations from a reality whose existence in- 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 83 

volves more than the sum total of these thought segrega- 
tions. 

Physical Measurement 
All physical measurement is relative. 

Mass Phase 

Mass phase is one of many action phases pertaining to 
matter. Formerly mass was considered to be that property 
of matter which served best to represent a body in the in- 
vestigation of its motion because it was intimately con- 
nected with motion, and also for the reason that it remained 
a constant throughout motion. For ultra-atomic particles 
this is no longer true except within well-defined limits. For 
bodies, however, the relation holds. The relativity of mass 
was established by Kaufmann, who showed that the mass of 
the electron varies with the variation in velocity. Ultimate 
matter is, therefore, not a fixed, unchanging something. We 
must readjust our notion of mass and think of it as a phase 
of kinetic matter. From this new viewpoint we define 
mass phase as follows: 

Mass phase is that segregated action phase of kinetic 
matter which lends continuity to physical change. 

Measurement of Mass Phase 

Let Fj and F^ be the force phases involved in the inter- 
action of two bodies exhibiting the respective mass phases 
Ml and Mo, and let a^ and a^ be the corresponding observed 
acceleration phases ; then the following relations hold : 

Fi = Mi.ai, 
F2 = M2 . a2, 

Ml _ Fi a2 ^ 
M2 ~ F2 a/ 

The latter expression points to two methods of relatively 
measuring mass phases; the first method being relative to 
the force phases, while the second method depends for its 
relativity upon the acceleration phases. 



84 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

Method I. Force Phases Used as the Relative 
Measure of Mass Phases 

It is evident that if tti = ao, then the expression 

Ml Fi a2 

^r^r = — • — becomes 

M2 F2 ai 

Mi^Fi 

M2 F2* 

This is the case when the two bodies are subjected to the 
common acceleration g due to gravity. In that case the 
force phases F^ and F^ become the corresponding weight 
phases W^ and W^ and we have : 

Wi = Mi.g 

W2 = M2.g, and consequently 

Mi^Wi 

M2 W2* 

It follows that we have a relativity equation between mass 
phases and force or weight phases. In other words, the 
mass phases are proportional to the weight phases. We 
have not achieved an absolute measure of the mass phase. 
The method is purely relative because the weight or force 
phase is not of the same conceptual order as the mass phase. 
Moreover, the fact that we have mathematically eliminated 
the common constant g does not involve the actual elimina- 
tion of that physical activity relation upon which the 
acceleration g depends. We have therefore used the force 
phase to measure the relative magnitude of the mass phase. 

Method II. Acceleration Phases Used as the Relative 
Measure of Mass Phases 
In the expression 

Ml _ Fi a2 ^ 
M2~F2 a/ 

if we arrange conditions so that F^ = Fo, then 

Mi_a2 

M..~n,' 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 85 

In this case the mass phases will be inversely proportional 
to the acceleration phases. This latter method is conse- 
quently no more absolute than the former. Hence the sec- 
ond method is merely a relative measure of the mass phase. 

Mathematical Definition of Mass Phase 

The mass phase ikf of a body is that relative phase magni- 
tude which is commensurate with the quotient obtained by 
dividing the magnitude of the force phase F by the magni- 
tude of the acceleration phase a. The truth of this defini- 
tion is evident from the following relations : 



F=:M.a = M^^\ therefore 



F F 
a 



m 

Measurement of the Magnitude of Motion. 
Velocity Phase 
The velocity phase is a mathematical measure of motion. 
The velocity phase v involves both space and time in that it 
is defined as the quotient obtained by dividing the distance 
s traversed by the center in the time period t consumed in 
the displacement. For a constant velocity the requirement 
is that the distance traversed in equal intervals of time, 
however small these time intervals may be, shall be equal. 
The general expression for velocity phase v is 

_s _ds 
^"t~dt' 

The term speed is used to denote velocity irrespective of 
direction. Motion generally involves both changes in velo- 
city and direction, hence the following general definition of 
velocity phase. 

The velocity phase of a center in any point of its path is 
the quotient obtained by dividing the immediately adjoining 
distance traversed by the time period of the center whose 
direction is regarded as the instantaneous tangent to the 
curve of its path of motion. Velocity phase is purely rela- 
tive and involves an arbitrary reference point or reference 
system. 



86 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

Acceleration Phase 

The acceleration phase is a mathematical measure of the 
change of the rate of motion. Like the velocity phase, it 
involves space and time and is always a relative measure. 
It involves a change in the velocity phase. The change in 
the velocity may involve an increase or a decrease (posi- 
tive or negative acceleration), it may involve a change in 
the direction of the motion, and it may involve a change in 
the velocity as well as in the direction. 

This may be stated mathematically by letting v^ and v^ 
be the respective velocities at the beginning and the end of 
a time period t, then the acceleration a is given by the 
relation 

„ V2 — Vl 

t 

The general definition of acceleration may be formulated 
as follows: The acceleration phase of a center in any 
point of its path is the quotient obtained by dividing the 
difference in the velocities dv accruing during an infini- 
tesimally short period of time dt by this time period dt. The 
path traversed is considered of infinitesimal length. The 
expression 

V2 — Vi 

a 

average acceleration or rate of change of velocity. 
When the distance traversed becomes infinitesimally 
short then (v^-v^) becomes dv, and t becomes dt, and the 
general definition, stated mathematically, becomes 

dv 
^ = dt- 

Force Phase 
Force phase is that segregated action phase of kinetic 
matter which qualifies the magnitude of the intensity of 
the real interaction between kinetic matter groups. The 
actual physical change is not brought about by independent 
force entities. There are no independent force entities. 
The intensity of the interaction, however, may be relatively 
measured in terms of force phases. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 87 

Mathematical Definition of Force Phase 
The force phase F is that relative phase magnitude which 
is commensurate with the product of the mass phase M 
and the acceleration phase a, hence 



F = M.a = M 



m 



Kinetic Reaction Phase 

From the general law of action and reaction we know 
that to every action there is opposed an equal reaction. 
Consequently the sum of the action and the reaction ex- 
hibited in a physical change is equal to zero. Now if we 
think of action as exhibiting a force phase and reaction as 
exhibiting a kinetic reaction phase, then we may state the 
general law as follows: 

The sum of all the force phases exhibited in a physical 
change plus the kinetic reaction phase equals zero. Stating 
this mathematically, we have : Sum of all the force phases 
+ the kinetic reaction phase = O ; or 

M.a. + Kinetic reaction phase = ; hence 

M.a. = — Kinetic reaction phase = — M.a = — F. 

The general expression will involve a constant of propor- 
tionality C. This constant C, however, becomes unity when 
the quantities involved in the expression are measured in 
terms of the same units. The negative sign indicates that 
the kinetic reaction phase R is opposed to the force phase F, 

Mathematical Definition of Kinetic Reaction Phase 
The kinetic reaction phase R is that relative phase magni- 
tude which is commensurate with the product of the mass 
phase M and the acceleration phase a. It is equal in magni- 
tude, but opposed to the force phase F, Consequently, 



R=-F=-M.a=-M 



m 



The Three Cosmic Fundamentals 

The conceptual structure of the physical universe is built 

upon the three fundamentals, space, time, and interaction. 

The last, i, e,, interaction, involves rational causation with 

its inevitable accompaniment of natural laws. The causa- 



88 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

tion is both primary and secondary. The interaction in the 
physical universe involves a manifold of secondary causes. 
Since the system is complete within itself, these secondary 
causes are as completely relative as all the relativity con- 
cepts. No secondary causation within the system can ac- 
count for its initial and maintained interaction. The uni- 
tary relativity system owes its existence to the Being of 
God. The three cosmic fundamentals consequently are 
space, time, and potential. 

The physical tapestry of the universe is a web woven 
from the woof of potential and the warp of those forms 
of apprehension which we call space and time. The pri- 
mary relativity concepts are built upon these three cosmic 
fundamentals. 



63. Secondary Relativity Concepts. 

The secondary relativity concepts are built up from com- 
binations of the primary relativity concepts. Consequently 
they also involve the three cosmic fundamentals as their 
basic constituents. Two principal conceptual combinations 
may be made from the force phase and the two forms of 
apprehension, space and time. 

I. The Force Phase Coupled with the Time Form 

When interaction exhibits a displacement of a center or 
body, then the action intensity may be considered as com- 
mensurate with the product of the force phase and the time 
interval involved in the change. 

Mathematical Definition of Impulse Phase 

If the force phase is constant both in magnitude and 
direction, then the impulse phase / is commensurate with 
the product of the force phase F and the time interval t of 
the change. Consequently we have the expression: 

I = F.t 

Now if the force phase varies in magnitude and direc- 
tion, then we must add, by the calculus, the impulse phase 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 89 

dl exhibited in infinitesimal intervals of time dL Therefore 
the expression becomes 

dI = F.dt, and 

1= /F.dt 



J o 



II. The Force Phase Coupled with the Space Form 
When interaction exhibits a displacement of a center or 
body, then the action intensity may be considered as com- 
mensurate with the product of the force phase and the dis- 
placement distance. 

Mathematical Definition of Work Phase 
If the force phase is constant both in magnitude and 
direction, then the work phase W is commensurate with the 
product of the force phase F and the distance s of displace- 
ment. Therefore we can write the following expression: 

W = F.s 

If the force phase varies in magnitude and direction, then 
we must add, by the calculus, the work phases dW exhibited 
in infinitesimal distances ds. Therefore the following ex- 
pression obtains : 

dW = F.ds, and 

W/F.ds 



f- 



Mathematical Definition of Energy Phase 
Energy phase and work phase are correlative concepts. 
The energy phase E is commensurate with the work phase 
W, which is developed during a change from an actual con- 
dition to a standard condition. The inverse process in- 
volves the same work phase magnitude. Consequently the 
energy phase E may be regarded as commensurate with the 
work phase W which must be expended in bringing about a 
change from a standard condition to an actual condition. 
Herein we clearly see the ascending and the descending pro- 
cesses involved in a change from a condition A to a condi- 
tion B, The energy phase, or the work phase involved, in 
passing either from condition A to condition B, or from 



90 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

condition B to condition A, is in either case of the 
same magnitude. 

The manifesting energy phase which is concomitant with 
motion is called kinetic energy, while the available work 
phase due to position is termed potential energy. An 
available work phase is commensurate with a potential en- 
ergy phase, while a developing or unfolding work phase is 
commensurate with the kinetic energy phase. Ultimately the 
various forms of energy phases are, in the last analysis, of 
a kinetic nature. If we regard the matter from the stand- 
point of action and reaction, then the kinetic energy phase 
E is commensurate with the work phase W involved in the 
production of a velocity phase v against the interacting 
kinetic reaction phase R, Stated mathematically this rela- 
tion takes the form 



E 
since 



= -W=- / R.ds=- /(-F)ds=- / i-M^^)lds; 



v = -T-, ds = v.dt, and 



E=- / i-M(^Hv.dt = M /v.dv = ^Mv2-iMvo^ 

In the above the first negative sign signifies that an energy 
phase E is developing as a v/ork phase W against the kin- 
etic reaction phase R. The negative sign preceding the 
term F.ds indicates that the force phase appears as a kin- 
etic reaction phase. 

The last of the above expressions, 

represents the change in the kinetic energy phase 
which is concomitant with that work phase which is in- 
volved in the change of the velocity from t\, to v. 

The relativity concepts defined above constitute the basic 
concepts from which all other necessary concepts may be 
derived. They have been defined as phases of interaction 
having no independent existence. In the following por- 
tions of the work the word "phase" has been omitted for 
the sake of brevity. We wish to emphasize the fact that 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 91 

this omission in no way alters the intent of the definition 
given above. The relativity concepts are the mathematical 
descriptions of arbitrarily chosen fragments of phenom- 
enal activity, and they do not even begin to exhaust the 
content and meaning of reality, which is known in its full 
intent only to God, its Creator. 

Interaction in a Unitary System 
Matter is that persistent phase of activity which ap- 
pears continuously throughout change and becoming. Mat- 
ter has persisted in its continuous and uninterrupted mani- 
festation throughout the ages. This persistence in the past 
constitutes our only basis for the assumption of its con- 
tinued manifestation in the future. We cannot prove that 
this assumption is valid indefinitely. Ultimately the per- 
sistence depends upon teleology above finite consciousness, 
that is, upon the omniscience and omnipotence of God. 
Phenomenally, matter is differentiated into a multiplicity 
of interacting and related activity centers. We have given 
the name monon to these activity centers. Regarding them 
from their force phase standpoint, we think of them as 
force centers. Since the energy phase may be considered 
as niore inclusive, we may think of them as centers of 
energy. These phases are not invariable. Their only con- 
stancy is persistency and continuity. This is true of the 
mass phase as well of all other action phases. Through- 
out a series of energy transformations in a given system 
there is no apparent evidence of a lose or gain of either 
mass, force, or energy, provided that we make the system 
sufficiently inclusive. This fact serves as the basis of the 
postulate of conservation. This persistency, which we call 
conservation, depends for its future continuation upon the 
life of God. Action phases do not exist as independent 
entities. Mass, force, and energy entities do not exist as 
independent existencies. Mass, force, and energy are 
phases of an activity which includes them and all other 
action phases. Modern scientific research bears out these 
contentions. The cosmos is a unitary interacting system 
in which the distance and duration are respectively the 
spatial and temporal indicators of the relative magnitude 
of the interaction between things. 



CHAPTER IV 
The Problem of a Physical Substratum 

64. Physical Substratum. 

Case I. ^Substratum Devoid of Qualities 

Contemplation of the world of phenomena leads us to 
the two fundamental concepts, Being and Becoming. In 
the last stage of every analysis of the nature of the objects 
of perception we encounter some type of elementary par- 
ticles which we name molecules, atoms, and electrons. Our 
question concerning the nature of an object finally resolves 
itself into the discovery of the kind of elements of which 
its material portion is made. It is a process of reducing 
complexity to simplicity. 

Let us take for consideration the well-known substance 
water. At ordinary temperatures water is a liquid, at 
higher temperatures it is a vapor, and at lower temperatures 
it is a solid. What, then, is water when it is not influenced 
by temperature or other conditions ? You will undoubtedly 
answer this question by saying that water is an existent 
something which under one condition reveals itself to sense 
as something A, while it appears as something B under 
another condition, and under a third condition it exhibits 
itself as something C. Experience has taught us that a sec- 
ond assumption is within the realm of the highly probable. 
This is the assumption that a reversal of the order of the 
conditions produces a reversal in the appearance of the 
states from the sequence A, B, C, to C, B, A, without the 
anomalous appearance of an alien state M totally foreign 
to the substance water. A thing, then, is what it is on 
account of the regularity of its changes within a given 
series. Independent of the assumed forms within the series, 
a thing has no existence independent of these forms. How- 
ever, you will maintain that the crux of the matter lies in 
the fact that this independent existence is the basic sub- 

92 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



93 



stratum about which states and forms drape themselves. 
You believe that the existent is truly represented schemati- 
cally in Figure 7, where a real substratum A is vitally associ- 



Ai 



A. 




The Real Substratum 

Void of Qualities. 

Having power of making states or 

qualities appear. 



States or 
Qualities. 



A. 



Figure 7 

ated with the states Ai,A2, and A3, which are its individual 
and personal property. Your contention, then, is that the 
real substratum A is the abiding essence of a thing, and 
that the A is the subject which is potent to give reality to 
the changing qualities and states which it owns in a manner 
analogous to the varying states of consciousness which you 
own as an individual ego. These arguments remind us of 
Berkeley's presentation in the "Principles of Human 
Knowledge," from which we quote the following: 

"But, say you, though it be granted that there is no 
thoughtless support of extension, and the other qualities 
or accidents which we perceive : yet there may, perhaps, be 
some inert unperceiving substance, or substratum of some 
other qualities, as incomprehensible to us as colours are to 
a man born blind, because we have not a sense adapted to 
them. But if we had a new sense, we should possibly no 
more doubt of their existence, than a blind man made to see 
does of the existence of light and colours. I answer, first, 
if what you mean by the word matter be only the unknown 
support of unknown qualities, it is no matter whether there 
is such a thing or not, since it no way concerns us : and I 
do not see the advantage there is in disputing about we 
know not what, and we know not why."^ 



^ Principles of Human Knowledge, Part I, Ixxvii. 



94 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

In the final analysis, then, you reduce substratum to a 
material of reality. It is neither this nor that, but a real, 
pure, and simple basis of this and that. In short, it is 
naught but the principle of reality. 

Objection to Case I 

How can an indeterminate, independent, and empty 
substratum A show preference at any one time for a^ as 
against a.y or ag ? By a process of successive negation, the 
"unknown support" of states and qualities, the ultimate 
material essence or substratum is reduced to an empty void. 
Let us quote again from Berkeley, in the Second Dialogue 
between Philonous and Hylas : 

*'Phil. Continue, good Hylas, to act the same ingenuous 
part, and tell me sincerely whether you can frame a distinct 
idea of entity in general, prescinded from and exclusive of 
all thinking and corporeal beings, all particular things 
whatsoever. 

*'Hyl. Hold, let me think a little. I profess, Philonous, 
I do not find that I can. At first glance me thought I had 
some dilute and airy notion of pure entity in abstract ; but 
upon closer attention it hath quite vanished out of sight. 
The more I think on it, the more am I confirmed in my 
prudent resolution of giving none but negative answers, and 
not pretending to the least degree of any positive knowledge 
or conception of matter, its where, its how, its entity, or 
anything belonging to it. 

*'Phil. When, therefore, you speak of the existence of 
matter, you have not any notion in your mind. 

"Hyl None at all. 

'*PhiL Pray tell me if the case stands not thus : at first, 
from a belief of material substance you would have it that 
the immediate objects existed without the mind ; then that 
their archetypes ; then causes ; next instruments ; then occa- 
sions ; lastly, something in general, which being interpreted 
proves nothing. So matter comes to nothing. What think 
you, Hylas? Is not this a fair summary of your whole 
proceeding?"' 



' The Second Dialogue, pp. 257, 258. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 
65. Physical Substratum. 



95 



Case II. Substratum Assumed to Possess Power op 
Selection and Attraction 

We present this case schematically in Fig. 8. The adher- 
ents to this view think of the states and qualities as inde- 
pendent entities. They assign to the real substratum two 



Ai 



- - Solid 



Independent 
-B States or 
Qualities. 



The Real Substratum. 
Power of Selection and Attraction. 



Figure 8 



fundamental properties of selection and attraction by which 
the substratum A takes unto itself a particular state, for 
instance, the solid state a^ shown in the scheme of Fig. 8. 

Objections to Case II 

First, How shall we explain the mechanism by which 
the real A selects, attracts, and incorporates with itself the 
state tti, in preference to another state 6i from another 
series of states or qualities ? 

Second. As far as phenomena are concerned, indepen- 
dent states and qualities give us all we need. A hypothetical 
substratum merely complicates the issue without in any 
way explaining the effects observed by the senses. 

In trying to create this independent substratum in a 
world beyond states and qualities we commit the same error 
as the person who ascribes the color of a body to the body 



96 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



beneath the pigment which was applied to produce the par- 
ticular color. The pigment does not communicate its color 
to the entire substance beneath it. The body does not select 
nor attract a particular pigment in preference to any other. 
We are forced to the conclusion that the quality of color is 
a part of the nature of the pigment and not of the body 
beneath it. You will retort that we are begging the ques- 
tion because it is the substratum of the pigment which is 
responsible for its color. We reply that the process by which 
the pigment selects from the cosmic warehouse a preferred 
color is inconceivable, and we reiterate that our objections 
are valid. 



66. Physical Substratum. 

Case III. Fixedness Given to States and Qualities by 
Injection of a Grain of Reality Into a Thing 
The desire to give permanence and fixedness to the states 
and qualities of a thing is the root of a notion, held by many, 
that a portion of the stuff of reality is injected into a thing 
(see Fig. 9) . This stuff of reality is the common basis or 

property of things, and when 
qualities and states are 
grouped about it we have ob- 
jects and things of the phe- 
nomenal world. In this stuff 
of reality we have something 
akin to the noumenon, or 
thing-in-itself, of Kant. Of 
the thing-in-itself Kant says: 
"We know only experiences, 
but not things-in-themselves." 
Nevertheless, Kant himself 
regards the thing-in-itself as 
the cause of phenomena in re- 
gard to both their form and 
matter. In this respect Kant 
involves himself in a serious 
self-contradiction, for in so far as he has limited the con- 
cept of causality to experience, the realm wherein the 
thing-in-itself is unknown, how, then, can the thing-in-itself 




Solidity, Color, etc. 
Figure 9 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 9% 

be the cause of phenomena? Schopenhauer believed that 
he unveiled the thing-in-itself in his emphasis of the will as 
the primary phenomenon, that which constitutes the very- 
basic essence of our real nature. However, since all we 
know of volition is phenomenal, Schopenhauer's principle 
of sufficient reason, which applies to phenomena, leaves 
the thing-in-itself undiscovered. We quote the following 
from Schopenhauer : "That what Kant opposed as thing-in- 
itself to mere phenomenon — called more decidedly by me 
representation — and what he held to be absolutely unknow- 
able, that this thing-in-itself, this substratum of all phe- 
nomena, and therefore of the whole of Nature, is nothing 
but what we know directly and intimately, and find within 
ourselves as the wilV* 

"The general meaning of the Principle of Sufficient 
Reason may, in the main, be brought back to us: that 
everything existing, no matter when or where, exists by 
reason of something else. Now, the Principle of Sufficient 
Reason is nevertheless a priori in all its forms : that is, it 
has its root in our intellect, therefore it must not be applied 
to the totality of existent things, the Universe, including 
that intellect in which it presents itself. For a world like 
this, which presents itself in virtue of a priori forms, is 
just on that account mere phenomenon : consequently, that 
which holds good with reference to it as the result of these 
forms, cannot be applied to the world itself, Le,, to the thing- 
in-itself, representing itself in that world." 

We see, then, that both Kant and Schopenhauer, in their 
sharp distinction between noumenon and phenomenon, in- 
ject into the world an antithesis, indefensible because the 
distinction, a mere product of the intellect, lacks confirma- 
tion in the groundwork of reality. 

Objections to Case III 
The error lies in postulating two separate and distinct 
entities in the groundwork of reality : first, a thing, and sec- 
ond, its content ; first, a substratum, and second, its qualities 
and states; first, a thing-in-itself, and second, phenomena. 
A grain of the real can no more convey reality to the diverse 
qualities associated with it than a pigment can convey its 
coloring to an object. It is futile to expect that a sub- 



98 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



stratum void of any content whatsoever can produce from 
its fatuous depths real states and qualities. Things are not 
real because of the presence of a real in them. Things do 
not become real because a real is injected into them, but they 
are real because they are capable of displaying, and actually 
do display, that type of activity which we term reality. 

67. Identity of the Real with the States and Qualities. 

Case IV. The Hypothesis of Interaction 
We show this case schematically in Fig. 10. The diffi- 
culties involved in the previous cases are due to a search 

for the thing-in-itself 



- Solid 






Liquid. — 



Gaseous 



beyond itself, to the 
separation in thought 
of thing and content. 
By admitting that a 
thing and its content 
Figure 10 are one, that qualities, 

states, and substratum are inseparable real unities, we avoid 
the difficulty. This is the fundamental tenet of the hypoth- 
esis of interaction which we adopt as the only solution of 
the problems reviewed above. We have referred to the per- 
sistence of the sequence in change. The change series A, B, C 
can be and is reversed by a reversal of the antecedent con- 
ditions. This permanence in the order of change consti- 
tutes the so-called laws of action of things. We cannot 
separate these laws from things with any more justice than 
we can think into the real a substratum beyond the real. 
Laws are not entities disparate from things; they are not 
external powers which influence from without the sequence 
in the activity of things. The separation of law and thing 
is the work of thought. The real knows no such separation. 
When the eternally real expresses its own nature, then 
thought, finding permanence in this ever changing thing, 
describes the persistence in the mode of behavior of things 
by postulating laws which hold dominion over the action of 
things. It is just as impossible to conceive and arrange an 
effective and operative understanding between laws and 
things regarded as separate entities as it is similarly to con- 
nect substratum and states considered as independent exist- 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 99 

ences. In this more complete view of activity we therefore 
maintain the identity of content, law, and thing. 

Change or becoming, exemplified in birth and death, in 
origination and decay, is the content of all perceptual knowl- 
edge. As Heracleitus, the Greek philosopher, pointed out, 
the phenomenal world is in a constant state of flux or becom- 
ing. The concept of being, opposed to that of becoming, 
owes its origin to the hope of finding persistence and per- 
manency in change or becoming. Observed phenomena tell 
a different legend to us than can be consistently brought 
forth by maintaining that an empty and void substratum is 
an effective basis of things. Things are, not by virtue of a 
substratum or ultimate substance in them, but they are, 
because their very nature makes it possible for them to 
convey to us the notion of persistence and permanence. This 
stability and permanence in things gave rise to the notion 
of a rigid, immutable nucleus or substance as the basic root 
of things. The prevalent notion of becoming or change is 
that the new real is merely a continuation of a previous real. 
The concept of a coming into or origination of a new real 
involves the notion that reality arises from a total absence 
of the real. Many superficial subterfuges have been resorted 
to in order to avoid this implication. 

It is true that the old real does not contain within itself 
the reality of the new. The old reality must be disposed of 
before the advent of the new real. A reality A will never 
cease to be identically equal to A until it ceases to exist. To 
originate and to pass away is a continuous process during 
which we can say that origination equals origination and 
passing away equals passing away. In other words, A=A 
only while A endures precisely as it is. This is the only 
sense in which we can conceive the validity of the Law of 
Identity. 

Should we demand the indestructibility of things as a 
consequence of the Law of Identity, we must also demand 
the immutability of all states, qualities, and relations which 
pertain to things. There would then be no phenomenal 
world. The notion of the continuation of the same real 
unchanged is not a valid one in view of the facts of the 
phenomenal world. Permanence, therefore, is to be found 
only in the sameness of the process of decay and becoming. 



100 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

Change, then, is not a succession of self-contained, immut- 
able reals A, B, C separated as entities distinct from each 
other. The reals A, B, C cannot exist during the most mi- 
nute interval of time in a condition of rest. The realities 
A, By and C cannot at any stage of the phenomenon of 
becoming be regarded as stationary independent beings. 
Every form of the real must mean that the phase A is as 
truly in continuous motion as any other phase of B or C, 
Moreover, the direction in which becoming advances, the 
particular sequence in vv^hich change takes place, must be 
inherent in the very nature of the thing to which reality is 
assigned. Laws external to reality are both superfluous 
and inoperative. Being, then, is not a passive, inert some- 
thing, but it is energy continuous in its manifestation, activ- 
ity permanent as the basic function of things. Continuous 
life and activity is what constitutes reality. 

These conclusions may remind you of the fundamental 
principles of Spinoza's philosophy. Far from denying this, 
we admit that we are at one with him if you will do him 
the justice of seeking for the basic thought which forms the 
nucleus of his reasoning. The method, however, by which 
Spinoza attacked his problem inevitably led him into diffi- 
culties in the rational development of his system which 
obscured the great truths which he announced. Spinoza 
says: "I understand Substance (substantia) to be that 
which is in itself and is conceived through itself: I mean 
that the conception of which does not depend on the con- 
ception of another thing from which it must be formed. 
An attribute I understand to be that which the intellect per- 
ceives as constituting the essence of a substance." For 
Spinoza the end of all thought is found in the principle of 
uniformity of Nature. Substance and law are, for him, iden- 
tical. Spinoza's method consists in deriving ultimate con- 
cepts by a process of elimination of the limitations imposed 
by the specific qualities observed in connection with the ob- 
jects and things of the phenomenal world. A concept derived 
by this method, from which every semblance of the reality 
of phenomena has been ejected, is nothing save a name 
applied to an empty void denuded of content. Hegel justly 
criticized Spinoza's Absolute by saying that it is like unto 
the lion's den to which all tracks lead, and from which none 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 101 

return. Spinoza creates a gulf between the world of reality 
and the world of phenomena, and his method is not able 
to provide a bridge over the chasm. In fact, no system 
which makes this distinction between appearance and reality 
can ever construct a rational connecting span between these 
worlds. His method prevents him from consistently and 
rationally reaching the ever more inclusive reality of the 
unitary interacting universe in which lesser realities find 
their life's consummation. Notwithstanding the shortcom- 
ings of his method, Spinoza realized — shall we say intui- 
tively ? — the unitary intimacy of substance, nature, and law, 
for he does point out that nature is the inherent energy, 
active and manifest in all that exists; it is ''natura natU' 
rans," and not merely the sum of all that exists, **natura 
naturata." 

Again we call attention to the fact that we do not agree 
with philosophers who, like Kant, separate reality into two 
distinct parts, noumena and phenomena. Reality is not a 
synthesis of two entities, a thing-in-itself and its phenom- 
enal aspects. If reality is a synthesis of two distinct 
essences, then we must assign separate properties to each 
of the two types. This would force us to separate the man- 
ner of knowing and perceiving into two modes correspond- 
ing with the two types of entities. The procedure may 
involve us in the conclusion that one type of reality is un- 
knowable and the other knowable. For this and other rea- 
sons previously stated we hold the view that the substratum 
states, qualities, and laws are not independent entities, but 
that a unitary and not a synthetic reality manifests its 
nature phenomenally to sense. In maintaining the identity 
of substratum and content it must not be inferred that we 
hold the non-existence of either. Reality is more than that 
which is given by sense perception. The reality of a thing 
proceeds from a source more potent than mere sense mani- 
festation. The mere isolated and individual data furnished 
by sense perception do not exhaust the significance of real- 
ity. The soul is more than thought, which in its turn is 
more than a mere sense stimulation. Nevertheless, the soul 
is a unitary being. A thing pulsates and throbs with a 
reality greater than the mere kinetic content of the "now." 
Its potential content of the "then" indicates a reality sus- 



102 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

tained and potentially assured, which appears as the con- 
tentless background of the content of the "now" and also 
as the potent generative background of the content of the 
"then." Thus, in thought, is substance sundered from its 
content because the present content does not exhaust the 
total reality of a thing. That phase of reality which assures 
continuity throughout change and relative permanence to 
individuality and discreteness constitutes the essense of sub- 
stance. Far from being a mere product of thought, sub- 
stance finds its significance in the very depths of reality. 
The permanence of which we speak points to the maintain- 
ing potentiality of God. Thus we are in accord with the 
intent of Scholasticism in its treatment of the relation 
between substance and the sensible accidents of forms, quali- 
ties, and states. 

68. The Problem of Physical Action. 

Thesis 

If we assume the independence of separate and distinct 
things, actions, states or forces, then it is impossible to 
transfer from a thing M to another thing N, an influence /, 
whether this influence be a thing, action, state, or force. 

We shall demonstrate the validity of this thesis under 
the three following cases: 

69. Case I (a). Influence I, a Thing 

This case and all allied cases may be reduced in such a 
manner that three things only are involved. 

In Fig 11 we show the factors involved in Case I (a). 
We assume that M, N, and / are things. At first hand there 




Dry Body 



Moist Body 

Figure 11 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 103 

seems to be nothing difficult in the notion that the thing / 
can separate itself from M and pass to N, causing a change 
in the latter. Let us examine the case more closely. In 
order to make our problem definite we shall suppose that 
the body M is a moist body, meaning by this statement that 
there is moisture / in the form of water present in the body 
M, We shall also suppose that the body iV is a dry body, 
meaning by this that no moisture in the form of water / is 
associated with the body N, If, then, we say that water / 
(being a real thing /) passes from the body M to the body 
N, and that when this transfer has been accomplished the 
body M, previously moist, becomes dry, while the body N, 
formerly dry, becomes moist, ive cannot then contend that 
either M or N has undergone any real change. All that we 
can justly say is that the transfer of / from M to iV has 
taken place. During the entire time, M remained M and N 
remained N and neither M nor N caused any modification 
in /. On this assumption our problem disappears, because 
what we wish to ascertain is how the influence / passing 
from M to iV causes a genuine change in M and N, Actual 
facts do, however, bear us out in the assumption that a real 
change has been produced in M and N, for it is true that as 
N begins to get moist, due to the incorporation of /, the 
particles of N are forced farther apart and consequently 
occupy a greater space in addition to a further change which 
consists in a modification of the vigor of the connection 
between the particles of N, A reciprocal change occurs in 
M, Upon the withdrawal of the moisture /, the drying body 
decreases in volume, its particles attain closer proximity, 
and the vigor of the connection between them undergoes a 
change. The mere recording of the fact of transfer of / 
from M to N has not contributed anything to our knowledge 
concerning these real changes in both M and N which are 
simultaneous developments. It is our desire to comprehend 
these very real changes in M and iV, and it is these modi- 
fications which constitute the gist of our problem. The 
only result accomplished is a new disposition of the seat 
of our problem. Our query takes a new and more definite 
form in that we now seek to comprehend how the presence 
of water I in N produces a change in N, and, moreover, how 
the withdrawal of / is a fact sufficiently potent to account 



104 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

for the modification in M. Suppose we add to our little 
world another body R, This simple addition complicates 
the problem beyond measure. Now we are confronted with 
the problem of a choice, by the thing /, of its final destina- 
tion. Will the thing / choose for its resting-place the body 
R in preference to the body Nl If we maintain that the 
choice of / will be the body N, then such a statement will 
have no more significance than if we maintained that the 
choice must be the body R, Moreover, what is there in- 
volved in our suppositions which will cause / to come to rest 
in either N or Rl Why not suppose, with equal show of 
justice, that the thing I, after parting company with M, 
avoids the bodies N and R and then tours the universe, with- 
out other aim or purpose, forever? As we have already 
noted, if we did grant that the thing / must, for some super- 
rational reason (whatever that is), proceed to the body N 
when liberated from M, then the mere incorporation of / 
with N still leaves the real problem unsolved. In fact, our 
Case I (a) reduces to Case I (b) as depicted in Fig. 12, 

Moist Body 
Dry Body 




M — Contracts 



Figure 12 

wherein our inquiry involves an unexplained "rapport" be- 
tween / and N. The existence of / in the interstices or voids 
of N is not a sufficient reason for a change in N. The 
things / and N may be alien and inimical in their real 
nature. 

The friendly services of the phantom "rapport" cannot 
span this irrational gulf, because we must insist upon "rap- 
port's" credentials and we must know somewhat of its 
method and manner of operation. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 105 

70. Case II. Influence I, a Force, State, or Action 

The attempt has often been made to avoid the difficulties 
of Case / by asserting that the mobile influence is either 
force, action, or state, and that / is not a thing. 

This assumption causes us to inquire how a force, state, 
or action / can separate itself from the body M and exist 
for even an infinitely short time as the force, state, or action 
of neither M nor N, What determines the direction of /? 
Why should / show a preference for N instead of any other 
body i^ of Fig. 13? 

The idea that / is able to show a preference involves the 
idea of a choosing consciousness, and we are lifted from 
the plane of matter to a plane of non-matter, mind, or spirit. 




© 



Figure 13 

We must here empnasize this fact that our entire discus- 
sion, viewed retrospectively, at some point in the analysis 
brings us face to face with an unknown something, other 
than matter, partaking of the nature of a selective con- 
sciousness. 

If we suppose that at the time of the transition of / the 
body M is subjected to a counteraction from N which directs 
/ toward N, then we are brought back to the original query, 
how N can influence M through an intervening distance, 
and how N can direct / in its motion from M to N. It does 
not help the difficulty if we reverse the order of the bodies 
in the above questions and cast the onus of the phenomena 



106 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

upon M instead of A^. Moreover, why should not / continue 
on forever in its voyage through space without becoming 
the state ofNorR or anything else ? If this is not the con- 
dition which is produced, and if / actually does travel to N, 
then we are again confronted with the idea of a selective 
power of an intelligent order, which we must ascribe to 
either M or N, whereby the direction and length of the path 
of / are determined. This means that our original problem 
is once more before us ; that is, the problem of how M or N 
can affect / at all. 

71. Case III. Contact in Space 

We show this case in Fig. 14, wherein the assumption is 
that contact is the indispensable preliminary condition for 
mutual action. This assumption, however, is of no avail, 

because we must explain why 
and how spatial contact causes 
previously independent and 
alien things, states, or forces 
to become interested in each 
other, thus producing the phe- 
nomena of change. Motion 
produced by impact in no way 
helps the matter, for mere 
"impact" is not a "potent 
^^"^^ something," but only an inci- 

dent and an item amongst many others involved in change. 
By the term contact we must confine ourselves to either 
the common boundaries of two objects constituting a sur- 
face without thickness, or a common point without exten- 
sion. It is evident, then, that such parts as comply with 
our true definition of contact cannot produce motion in 
accordance with any precept advanced by science, for it 
can be only such molecular portions of the body as are not 
in contact with the other body which can produce motion 
in it. Thus we are again placed squarely before our funda- 
mental problem of showing how distant particles can pro- 
duce effects in other things. After contact has been estab- 
lished we must inject genuine action into the system by 
resorting again to some influence / as the active agent which 
causes change in the other body. 




SCIENTIFIC THEISM 107 

After contact has been established between M and N, 
without inquiring into the manner whereby this is brought 
about, the following represents some of the possible changes 
which may take place : 

1. M may be absored by N, 

2. N may be absorbed by M. 

3. M or N, or both, may be disintegrated. 

4. N may be set in motion in the same or some other 
direction than M. 

5. N may remain immovable and M may exhibit motion 
in an opposite or some other direction. 

6. Motion of both M and N may cease. 

Since mere contact in space does not determine the 
choice between these or other possibilities, we face once 
more the ever present selective intelligent power which 
must be introduced to make change a reality in the world 
of phenomena. 

We have seen that only those portions of a body which 
are not in contact with another body can, under the preva- 
lent assumptions of science, be efficacious in producing 
motion, consequently this very fact constitutes an admission 
that action at a distance is a reality. Action at a distance, 
however, is inconceivable if we assume that things are inde- 
pendent and unrelated entities. Moreover, we have seen 
that an influence /, acting as a carrier of possible effects, is 
an impossible notion. 

Therefore we are forced to give up the notion of inde- 
pendent things and to assert the mutual dependence of all 
centers of reality on an interacting unitary system. 

72. The Monon. 

What consistent description can we give to these ulti- 
mate centers of reality which we shall call mononsi 

The ultimate particles or monons must be genuine uni- 
ties. The term unity cannot be applied to that which con- 
tains independent and unrelated parts so constituted that 
an experience in one part is not felt with equal intensity by 
all the other parts. Such a conglomeration is not a unity 
but a multiplicity of independent unrelated particles. A 
real unity or monon M must be so constituted that any 
effect or impression i upon any one of its points a must 



108 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

simultaneously be felt with equal intensity (i) throughout 
the entirety of Af as a state of all of M. If the ultimate 
monon M is of such a nature that the state or impression i 
must be transmitted from point a of M to point b and then 
to c, from one point to another throughout M, then this con- 
struction upon M is nothing more than our ordinary concep- 
tion of a number of distinct an separate parts or entities, 
for effects are supposed to be transmitted just in this man- 
ner from a separate entity a to another entity b and so on 
through the series involved. Consequently the concept of a 
real, genuine, unitary monon M must not involve the idea of 
the transmission of an impression i from one point a to an- 
other point b of Af. 

The impression i, whatever be its nature, must be simul- 
taneously felt throughout M with eqital intensity without 
the aid of a process of transmission. If the impression i 
be in the nature of a motion, then the motion i imparted to 
a point a of M must also be, simultaneously, a motion of the 
point z oi M located diametrically opposite to a. In other 
words, no time must be consumed in communicating the 
motion from point a to point z along the line az of a monon 
M. Moreover, the intensity of the effect at z must be equal 
to the intensity at a. 

The three elements introduced into the concept of the 
monon M are as follows : 

1. Unity. 

2. Extension. 

3. Equality of the intensity of imposed effect through- 
out the monon. 

Actual data of experience constitute the only legitimate 
test by which the validity of these three elements may be 
determined. The data of experience present nothing ad- 
verse to the notion of unity. Every notion formulated con- 
cerning an ultimate particle pictures it as an entity and a 
unity, but the scientific concept of such a unity is not a 
critical and consistent concept ; the word is merely thought 
without analyzing the implications. 

The element of extension is taken for granted by all 
scientific positions. It is regarded as the primary fact of 
experience. The third element which we have introduced as 
a necessary and inevitable factor in the construction of a 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 109 

real monon is not borne out by the data of experience if the 
eqioality of the intensity is associated with the second ele- 
ment of extension, because experience teaches us that 
the intensity of a force varies, in some manner, with the 
distance between the particles. An ultimate particle com- 
posed of disparate independent parts, we have seen, is of 
no value in formulating the conception of a real unitary 
monon. It is evident that the data of experience force us 
to give up either the second element relating to extension or 
the third element relating to the equality of the intensity. 
We prefere to give up the notion of extension, for it only 
involves us in an inexplicable multiplicity of parts, and does 
not involve a potent dynamic factor which is the paramount 
element in the universe. Eliminating the second element, 
we retain for the monon the two mutually consistent ele- 
ments : 

(a) Unity. 

(6) Equality of the intensity of imposed effect through- 
out the monon. 

In other words, for us, unity and activity are the vital 
elements of the monon ; extension in space is merely a mode 
in which this active, dynamic, and unitary reality exhibits 
itself in the phenomenal world. Extension, per se, is not 
an independent dynamic principle of the world ; it is impo- 
tent in the production of phenomena; it is merely one of 
many modes in which the real manifests itself. It is a 
variable phase of activity. Consequently, we do not hesi- 
tate, when consistency demands, to give up this notion of 
extension as an invariable quantum in connection with our 
center of reality, the monon. 

We therefore reduce the world to a system of unextended 
centers of reality or activity, the monons, which affect each 
other at a distance. Through interaction the monon ex- 
hibits extension. 

The phenomenon of gravitation comes to our assistance 
in bringing physical evidence before us which substantiates 
our assertions. Gravitational activity is instantaneous. If 
gravitation were a phenomenon which required time for the 
realization of its activity, then the orbits of the planets 
would not be closed curves but spirals along which the 
planets would progress outward from the sun. Even for a 



110 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

velocity one million times greater than that of light, changes 
in the orbits would have been observed by astronomers. 
Since tendencies to an outward motion have not been ob- 
served during historic times, we argue that gravitation is 
not a time phenomenon, but an activity which is instan- 
taneous in its effects. 

All that we have said concerning the problem of physical 
action holds equally well for the ganglionic and commissural 
nerve-tissue of the brain. All the conclusions pertain to 
these forms of activity centers with equal validity. 

73. The Unity of Things. 

We may represent the sum total S of all cosmic reality by 

S^yia, b, c, R) =yiUnity), or S=f{R]. 

In such a system a change a is not merely a change of 
one element A, for the reason that to extend the conse- 
quences of this change in A to another reality B, a medium 
of transmission is required ; but it is a change in S without 
the necessity of a lapse of time t before it becomes a change 
in S, By the reality S we mean an infinitely greater reality 
than the mere content of our thought, for that content 
deals merely with the eternally subsisting relations of the 
knowable. Reality is forever something more than 
thought. We regard R, in the expression 

S=/iR), 

as the animating energy of the world, the manifesting 
dynamic principle of the cosmos, whereas the manifesta- 
tions, known, unknown, and possible, are represented by 
S. Our expression is an equation, therefore we are not 
divorcing content and reality. For us content and reality 
are one, and 5^ is merely a function of R. 

A crude mathematical analogy to the interaction be- 
tween activity centers in this unitary system called the 
cosmos is found in the infinite series 

hhh-^y Tihsj n^zhis, to infinity. 

A successive summation of terms gives us 

hhif-ll UUh UUh approaching 1. 

The summation is an infinite process which cannot be 
accomplished in time. Nevertheless, we know definitely 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 111 

that if we continue the summation indefinitely the total 
sum can never exceed unity. There are possible an in- 
finite number of terms; nevertheless, the sum of this in- 
conceivable totality cannot exceed unity. Suppose, now, that 
a change in the first term occurs so that 1/2 becomes 1/3, 
then this may be compensated by a change in the second 
term from l^ to 5/12; in other words, the first term has 
been decreased by 1/6 and the second term has been in- 
creased by the same amount, consequently no change in the 
totality of 5 has occurred. Innumerable similar compen- 
sating changes may be imagined to take place in any or 
all the terms of iS without affecting the total which 5 
represents. 

It is evident that this crude analogy cannot do justice to 
what we desire to express by S being a function of R and 
equalling unity, for we never will be able to state the com- 
plete significance and import of the idea R which we re- 
gard as the vital principle of the universe. 

We find in music another analogy for the unity which 
we assign to 5. An orchestral production is a unitary 
structure similar to S, The orchestral composition is cast 
about a tonic or keynote. Its part movements clamor for 
resolution, its modulations, anticipations, and cadenzas 
constitute harmonic structures postulating and necessitat- 
ing each other, while the entire structure is, verily, a 
prayer for the return of the tonic. 

In the personal ego we shall observe our most perfect 
analogy of the unity which we ascribe to S, A conscious 
ego E comprehends, in conjunction with an act of the senses, 
the existence of an a both as a something which enjoys an 
individual existence of its own and as a genuine state of the 
ego E, The continuous ego reveals to itself, through mem- 
ory, both past and present as being the property of that 
particular ego. It is this unity which persists through a 
multiplicity of changing states, exemplified in the conscious 
ego, which serve as the microscopic prototype of the unity 
which we associate with the idea S, 

The idea S includes within its unity all types and degrees 
of self-affirmation, from the conscious self to the lowest 
form of a material unit. Within S, a thing, therefore, is 
merely one of its elemental activities. 



112 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

74. Can Matter Act Where It Is Not? 

Can a thing act where it is not? This question has 
deeply disturbed the meditation of the scientists. Those 
who have replied in the negative have presented the ether 
hypothesis as the only solution remaining. Let us investigate 
the implication involved in the terms of the question. The 
word "act" may be considered as involving two factors : (1) 
a change in the thing itself; and (2) an influence exerted by 
the thing which produces a change in some other thing or 
things. The word "thing" may likewise involve two no- 
tions: (1) that things are unrelated and independent; (2) 
that things are related and mutually dependent. If we mean 
by "act" merely a change in the thing A, then it is evident 
that the thing A acts only where it is. Similarly, a second 
thing B acts only where it is. If we mean by "act" both a 
change in the thing A and the generation of an influence /, 
then we are forced to admit interaction between mutually 
dependent things. This has been conclusively proved in the 
preceding. Consequently, if we adopt this latter meaning 
for the word "act," we are forced to the second conclusion 
concerning things, i. e., that they are mutually dependent 
in an interacting unitary system. In addition to the above, 
our question involves the notion of space. The thing A is 
separated from the thing E by a distance D. Space itself 
may be interpreted in a twofold manner: (1) it may be 
regarded as a genuine form of reality capable of acting as 
a barrier to action; (2) space may be regarded as merely 
a form of apprehension by means of which the relative 
intensity of the interaction is measured. 

The idea that an influence / passes from one thing A to 
another thing B has been shown to be an impossible notion. 
Physical science cannot point to one single instance where 
force has existed, even for one moment of time, as an inde- 
pendent entity apart from matter. Out of the above stated 
possible combinations depending upon the significance given 
to the crucial ideas involved in our question we may for- 
mulate the following four tentative assumptions : 

I. That things are independent entities. That space is a 
barrier or insulator which prevents action at a distance. 
That the intervening distance between things may be over- 
come in two ways: 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 113 

1. By the transfer through space of independent influ- 
ences from one thing to another. 

2. By means of a continuous ether which permits the 
transfer of motion from one point to another. 

II. That things are independent. That space is not a 
barrier to distance action. In this case we dispense with the 
idea that independent influences are conveyed from one 
thing to another thing. This assumption involves the pos- 
sibility of action at a distance and consequently a medium 
or ether is not required for the transmission of influences. 

III. That things are mutually interdependent in a uni- 
tary interacting system. That space is a barrier to the 
transmission of influences. That the barrier may be over- 
come in two ways : 

1. By the transfer through space of independent influ- 
ences from one thing to another. 

2. By means of a continuous ether capable of transfer- 
ring influences from one point to another. Physical 
science ultimately reduces these influences to resultant 
motions. 

IV. That things are mutually interdependent in a uni- 
tary interacting system. That space is a form of appre- 
hension which serves merely as a relative measure of the 
intensity of the interaction. That space is not an inde- 
pendent reality capable of serving as a barrier to action, 
but that it is a form of apprehension by means of which the 
perceiving subject becomes aware of the relative magni- 
tude of the interaction. 

We shall now discuss the relative merits of the four 
assumptions : 

Assumption I 
We have already demonstrated the truth of the theses 
pertaining to Physical Action (see paragraph 68 and the 
following). We have shown that if we assume the inde- 
pendence of separate things, actions, states, or forces, then 
it is impossible to transfer from a thing A to another thing 
B, an influence /, whether this influence be a thing, action, 
state, or force. This thesis is true not because space is a 
barrier which prevents action at a distance, or action at all, 
but because the very assumption that things are independent 



114 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

creates an insurmountable harrier against such a transfer. 
Space does not play the role of isolator of things in the sense 
of creating a barrier against action. The difficulty lies not 
in the real significance of space, but in the notion of the 
independence of things. The insertion of an ether or con- 
tinuum between thing A and thing B is an attempt to unify 
A and B so that A shall be mechanically connected with B 
because of an auxiliary binding or connecting ether. By 
its introduction of the ether science admits the fact that 
physical action is inexplicable without the supposition of 
the unification of the discrete in an interacting unitary 
cosmos. The artificial mechanical concept of the ether, 
however, cannot unify discreteness. In fact, no mere act 
of thought can unify an actual physically discrete multi- 
plicity. By this statement we mean that a thought product 
like the ether cannot unify that which is already assumed to 
be discrete, separate, and independent. We must consider 
the unity of things as a given fundamental of reality. When 
we admit this — and admit it we must — then the ether 
becomes superfluous as a unifying concept. The principal 
function of the ether is to bring about a condition of unin- 
terrupted and continuous contact. We have already seen 
that contact in space does not help us to unify discreteness 
(see paragraph 71) . Assuming continuous contact through 
and by means of an all-pervading ether, we are as far 
from an explanation of physical action as if we totally 
ignored the concept. Action at a distance is readily under- 
stood when we realize that things are related and interact- 
ing in a system which primarily was and continues to be 
a unity because of a creative and sustaining act of God. 
We conclude that the first assumption is untenable. 

Assumption II 
If we assume that space is not a harrier to physical action 
at a distance, this admission in no way helps us to under- 
stand the manner in which physical action is brought about 
if we persist in maintaining the independence of things. 
If things are independent, then the physical universe is 
eternally a chaos out of which nothing but the unintelligible 
can be derived. In a condition of chaos the causal nexus has 
no meaning and that uniformity which we describe in terms 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 115 

of natural laws has no significance. The causal nexus and 
uniformity are unthinkable except in a cosmos which in- 
volves relatedness and interdependence in a system whose 
fundamental feature is unity. We conclude that whatever 
construction is put upon the notion of space, this construc- 
tion in no way modifies the content of the notion of inde- 
pendence. The fundamental premise that things are inde- 
pendent vitiates any and every assumption concerning the 
nature of space. We cannot obviate the implications of 
"independence" by assuming that space is not a barrier to 
physical action. For these reasons we hold that the second 
assumption is untenable. 

Assumption III 

The assumption holds that things are interdependent in 
a unitary system in which the barrier to action interposed 
by the genuine reality space must be overcome. We have 
already proved that independent influences cannot be trans- 
ferred through space from one thing to another. We have 
shown that the concept of the ether does not contain the 
solution of this desired transfer. Moreover, we do not 
admit that space is a genuine independent reality which is 
capable of acting as a barrier to physical action. Further- 
more, the primary premise that things are interdependent 
in a unitary interacting system contains within itself all 
that is required to account for physical action. Space itself 
is not independent of interaction; it is not an alien entity 
foreign to interactions, but it is a form of apprehension 
which acquires significance through interaction. We, the 
perceiving subjects, described interaction in spatial and 
temporal terms. Since space is not independent of interac- 
tion, we conclude that the terms of the third assumption are 
mutually incompatible and hence this assumption also proves 
untenable. 

Assumption IV 

The previous conclusions point to the fact that the terms 
of the fourth premise are not only mutually compatible, but 
that they constitute the only premises under which physical 
action becomes intelligible. Thus we derive from another 
viewpoint the truth of the fundamental thesis of interaction 
in a unitary system. 



116 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

75. The Transmission of Motion According to Physics. 

A physicist once maintained that there are only two 
ways in which an influence can be transmitted from one 
body to another. In order to illustrate his contention he 
took the case of two ships A and B separated by a certain 
amount of water W, The two methods of transmitting an 
effect or influence would then be as follows : 

I. The motion of ship A can be transmitted to ship B by 
means of the disturbance of the water W brought about by 
the initial motion of ship A, The water W set into motion 
by the movement of ship A communicates this motion to the 
ship B, 

II. Ship B can be set in motion by the impact of a 
cannon ball fired from ship A, 

The intent of both cases is to prove that action at a dis- 
tance is impossible. We shall use the illustration to prove 
that both cases involve action at a distance. 

The first case involves contact between ship A and water 
W and also contact between ship B and water W. The sec- 
ond case involves contact between Ship A and cannon ball C 
and also contact between ship B and cannon ball C brought 
about by the discharge of the cannon. 

In paragraph 71 we have seen that spatial contact in- 
volves either the common boundaries of two objects, in 
which case the boundaries envelope a surface without thick- 
ness, or a common point without extension. It is evident 
that such parts of the contiguous bodies which comply with 
our true definition of contact cannot produce motion in ac- 
cordance with any precept advanced by science, for it can be 
only such molecular portions of the body which are not in 
contact with the other body which can produce motion in it. 
Place two sheets of paper in contact and nothing in particu- 
lar happens from the mere contact. No motion is produced 
because of the mere contact. If motion is produced, it is 
due to some genuine activity agency — the hand, for ex- 
ample — located back of the common surface of contact. 
Consequently the contact area between ship A and water W 
or cannon ball C and ship B, or powder P and cannon ball C 
has in itself no potency to produce motion. The motion, 
then, is due to those particles which are not located along 
the common contact surface. These particles may be either 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 117 

conscious or unconscious activity centers. There is no evi- 
dence to substantiate the former supposition. All evidence 
points to the truth of the latter assumption. If the particles 
are regarded as independent entities, they must be endowed 
with the ability to choose and direct the type of influence 
and the direction of its motion to a preferred destination. 
This involves a conscious volitional activity which facts 
deny to the material particles. Interaction of interdepen- 
dent centers in a unitary system is the only rational solution 
of the problem. The choosing of the spatial location and 
type of the action is not a conscious volitional act on the 
part of the particles, but it is a deterministic mode of inter- 
action, describable in terms of the uniformities called nat- 
ural laws, and exhibited in a unitary system which reflects 
a phase of the creative thought of God. The deterministic 
character of things which insures uniformity in interaction 
is due to the imprint of God's creative thought. This con- 
stitutes another proof of the existence of God. Returning 
to the consideration of the component particles of a body, 
we are reminded that science holds that bodies are composed 
of molecules, and molecules are composed of atoms. The 
atoms, in their turn, are composed of sub-atomic particles. 
None of these constituent elementals are regarded by science 
as being in contact with each other. On the contrary, there 
is ample distance between them all to allow for free orbital 
motions. Therefore, if motion results, it must be due to 
transmitted motion from particle to particle. But these 
elemental constituents of bodies never come into actual con- 
tact with each other or with the ultimate constituents of 
other material groups. Therefore action at a distance must 
take place between the elementals of bodies. Consequently 
what has actually been shown by the physicist, by the cases 
cited, is that certain conditions must be satisfied if this or 
any other particular phenomenon shall ensue. In the two 
cases mentioned the primary condition is that the distances 
between the elementals shall be small. According to science, 
real distances intervene between the elementals. Conse- 
quently effects, of whatever nature they may be, are realized 
at a distance. Therefore, to produce the phenomenon cited, 
we must comply with those governing relations which are 
the very foundation of the physical universe. In other 



118 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

words, for the cases quoted, we cannot expect motion to 
result in ship B if ship A is placed in an empty portion of 
space far removed from ship B, The fact that this hypo- 
thetically empty space is devoid of matter is not the reason 
for the failure to produce the phenomenon ; for whether the 
void be small, as in the case of the voids between the ele- 
mentals of bodies, or great, as assumed in the hypothetical 
case in which ship A is placed in a vacuum far remote from 
ship B — in either case we deal with a void equally uncon- 
querable for the physicist who obstinately refuses to grant 
the possibility of that which always is involved in physical 
action ; that is, action at a distance. We draw the further 
self-evident conclusion that intervening distance is merely 
a measure of the nearness or remoteness at which a particu- 
lar phenomenon may result. For instance, if we wish cer- 
tain types of chemical action to take place, we must arrange 
conditions so that the intervening distances are exception- 
ally small in addition to providing for the free mobility of 
the particles. This we accomplish by solutions and the 
electric furnace. Space, then, is a chart of the relative inter- 
action intensity values. Space is meaningless as an inde- 
pendent reality. 

At this point in the argument the physicist produces his 
jug of ether, saying, "Let me pour this stuff freely into the 
universe and all your troubles are solved. My ether is the 
most pliable concoction imaginable. It is rarer than the 
rarest gas, but whenever occasion demands it becomes so 
rigid that it can withstand a pressure of 37,000 tons per 
square inch (according to Maxwell). In comparison with 
the rigidity of high-carbon steel, whose ultimate strength is 
about fifty tons per square inch, my ether is a giant. Fortu- 
nately for the planets and atoms, my giant, although over 
seven hundred times more rigid than high-carbon steel, is 
very sympathetic, and allows them to pass right through 
him without causing either him or them the slightest incon- 
venience or pain." 

The purpose of the ether, then, is to do for a particle A 
and another particle B what the water W was supposed to 
do for the ship A and the ship B. The problem is identically 
the same in either case. In both cases it is an attempt to 
account for physical action through spatial contact. That 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 119 

this attempt fails utterly has already been shown. Mere 
contact between particle A and ether E can never explain 
the transfer of an influence / from particle A to ether E. 
It is really an attempt to establish interaction and to create 
a unity out of the discrete particles of the universe. No 
artificial thought product like the ether can ever unify 
the physically discrete. If the unity does not actually exist, 
then a mere thought concoction can never produce a genu- 
ine physical unity. We maintain that the unity of things is 
a real given exemplified in interaction. Therefore we need 
no artificial ether concept to unify the physical universe. 

Finally, the physicist will maintain that all is ether and 
that the discrete particles are merely manifestations in the 
ether and of the ether. This is his final and most consistent 
attempt to produce unification. Unfortunately, he must 
localize the disturbances in the ether in order to give a 
semblance of physical reality to his ether particles. In 
other words, he introduces discreteness into his continuum 
and thus breaks down his own parent concept. If there 
be no discreteness, then the empty void is as potent a notion 
as the continuum or ether. The moment, however, that the 
physicist localizes the ether particle, differentiates it, as it 
were, into discrete nodes, vortices, centers, waves, or what 
not, then he is face to face with all the difficulties already 
considered under the caption of "The Problem of Physical 
Action" (see paragraph 68 and the following). He must 
show how an influence / can be properly transferred in the 
right direction and through the correct distance from an 
ether center A to another ether center B, If the ether cen- 
ters be regarded as independent, then this ether concept will 
involve the same insurmountable difficulties as are met with 
in the case of empty space. If he admits our primary con- 
tention that the ultimate centers, whatever be their nature, 
are interdependent and interacting in a unitary system, 
whatever be the nature of that system, then his ether be- 
comes superfluous even if it could be made to be self-con- 
sistent. We have shown that the ether is far from self- 
consistent. We have shown that physical action is impossible 
except under the assumption that the physical universe 
is a cosmos of related interacting things. For the above- 
stated reasons we hold that the ether is inconsistent and 



120 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

superfluous. Consequently we maintain that the physicist 
has failed in his attempt to unify the physical universe 
by the concept of the ether. It follows that he has no 
alternative left but the acceptance of the truth of action at 
a distance. 



CHAPTER V 

The Model of the Physical Universe According to 
THE Space-Time Potential 

76. The Real Purpose of the Ether. 

There are almost as many ethers as there are physicists. 
Certain resemblances to matter are evident in every ether 
hypothesis. The ether model is, in fact, always based upon 
certain fundamental properties of matter, reduced either to 
zero or raised to the nth power. The continuous occupation 
of space seems to be common to all of them. Matter is here 
and there. Ether is supposed to be everywhere; hence we 
have, in the notion, the space occupation of matter raised to 
the nth power. The ether is a kind of maximum and mini- 
mum of matter properties. The theory was first announced 
by Huyghens and later it was developed by Young and 
Fresnel. At the outset it was a protest against the emission 
theory of Newton. If it is thought of as a solid, it is en- 
dowed with incompressibility. Other thinkers ascribe in- 
finite compressibility to the ether; in either case, matter 
properties extended to an ultimate limit. F. Neumann and 
MacCullagh adhered to the incompressibility notion, while 
Fresnel preferred the hypothesis of infinite compressi- 
bility. Hertz refers to it as an isotropic, homogeneous and 
restraining medium. Lord Kelvin originated the gyrostatic 
ether model. We are told by some that the ether is struc- 
tureless, incompressible, motionless, but capable of being 
set in motion, non-elastic, capable of indefinite subdivision, 
and that the resulting parts can move over each other with- 
out friction. No known reality in the universe satisfies 
these specifications. Empty space (vacuum) qualifies bet- 
ter than any form of matter. After all is said, the ether is 
merely an imagined realization of the desire that at every 
instant there shall everywhere be something which is in 
intimate responsive connection with matter. Sometimes the 

121 



122 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

ether is regarded, after the analogy of a jfiuid, as an infi- 
nitely compressible homogeneous fluid. Then again, the 
solid to the nth power becomes the model. As a solid it is 
considered by some as movable and by others as immovable. 
Matter becomes the place of a single particle of this etherial 
substance. By some the material ether particle is regarded 
as a hole in the ether, and by others as a vortex or 
a point of torsion. The elements of the ether concept, 
finding their original source in the properties of matter, 
are carried so far beyond the nature of this source that 
they become inoperative. It is further demanded of 
this ether substance that it shall serve as a medium for the 
propagation of all that varied class of vibratory motion 
which apparently fails to find an adequate explanation 
under the old emission theory. Then again it seems desir- 
able that the ether shall be capable of exerting pressure 
upon such moving elementaries as electrons. This is par- 
ticularly true in the theory of Lorentz. The difficulties 
encountered in reconciling these demands placed upon the 
ether model, constructed from the physical properties of 
matter expanded or contracted so far beyond the bounds 
of reality that they become either inconceivable or self- 
contradictory, are so insurmountable that many serious 
investigators have concluded that the notion is totally inade- 
quate properly to correlate the ever-growing* array of 
experimental facts. 

The apartness and independence of matter is the basic 
fact underlying the desire "that at every instant there shall 
everywhere be something which is in intimate responsive 
connection with matter." Is there that which can accom- 
plish this without including the objectionable elements in 
the ether model? Many facts point toward fruitful chan- 
nels along which consistent development may proceed. If 
we abandon the idea that material centers are self-sufficient 
and independent except under localized conditions, then we 
have removed the greatest difficulty in the way of under- 
standing any and every type of phenomenal activity. In 
other words, admit interaction in a unitary system of inter- 
related centers, and the terrors of the vacuum disappear. 
It was this very dread of a vacuum which called forth the 
desire that "there shall everywhere be something." 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 123 

77. The Concurrent System. 

In the further development of our model to meet the 
requirements of class phenomena, we must adhere com- 
pletely to those basic distinctions and properties which con- 
stitute our concept of matter. We must neither minimize 
nor maximize these properties. Were we to find that matter 
is materialized energy — that is, an ultimate particle is a 
work center — this discovery (already a fact) must not and 
cannot affect the nature of that primitive content of matter 
which we shall employ in our model. The concurrent sys- 
tem or vehicle we desire can be ultra-material only in the 
sense that it may be constructed from the very ultimates of 
matter. It must not be ultra-material in the sense that we 
can carry the properties of matter to their zero or infinite 
limits. Our concurrent system, composed of the ultimates 
of matter, may be thought of as emanating from or con- 
centrated within matter in accordance with the require- 
ments of the particular activity. 

The motions of these ultimates must be connected with 
the motions of their related matter groups. Through the 
varied relations between bodies we may know these vehicle 
ultimates, if not in their direct effects, then through their 
indirect effects. The further extension of the concurrent 
system along surfaces in space may be contemplated as con- 
sisting in the interaction of the ultimate centers disposed 
in configurations which insure equilibrium. Such spatial 
surfaces would constitute resistive fields of centers inter- 
acting at a distance, for matter is discrete and not continu- 
ous. Motion cannot Be comprehended upon any other basis 
than that of actual observed motion, which always presup- 
poses discrete particles capable of genuine displacement for 
the very reason that they are discrete. Action at a distance, 
regarded as interaction between related centers in a unitary 
system, far from being inconceivable, is the only assumption 
which is consistent and in accord with reality. In the gravi- 
tational activities we have a universal exemplification of 
action at a distance. All attempts which have been 
made to escape this conclusion concerning gravitational 
action have had recourse to the ether hypothesis, which, 
as we have seen, contains the seeds of its own destruc- 
tion. 



124 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

78. Fields of Interaction. 

The resistive fields are really fields of interaction which 
may be regarded as both resistive and receptive. Space may 
be considered as laminated in every direction v^ith such 
fields. Empty space has no meaning from, this point of 
view, for the reason that every surface in space is subjected 
to interaction, which results in giving to every one of its 
points a definite work or energy value. The motion of a 
particle within a given surface can be definitely predicted 
if we have a prevision of the work value of the points in 
the surface. Our model, therefore, may include, without 
inconsistency, planes and surfaces free from ultimate cen- 
ters because such planes will still have definite energy sig- 
nificance for every point within them. If a particle A moves 
into an interacting field containing n ultimates, then the 
future motion depends upon: (1) its actual position in the 
field; (2) its mass; (3) its velocity; (4) the force condition 
of the field due to the precise interaction at the moment con- 
sidered. Moreover, the force conditions of the field depend 
upon : (1) the precise location of the n ultimates within the 
field and their complete interaction, which must include 
themselves and all the other ultimates; and (2) the 
previous motion and interaction condition of the par- 
ticle A. 

79. The Scientific Renaissance. 

When the true nature of the electron was established, 
science was born again. Matter was then forever dethroned 
and the energy phase was restored to its rightful heritage in 
the realm of knowledge. Seers like Ostwald realized the 
truth that energy is the inclusive action phase, while matter, 
as a separate independent entity, is the phantom of the 
imagination. It remained for J. J. Thomson to demon- 
strate this experimentally. As one manifestation of energy 
matter is truly real, but as something alien to energy, a 
dark unrelated background for the drama of physical action, 
as such matter has no reality. Matter is of energy, not 
independent of energy, and energy itself is merely a phase 
of interaction. 

This epoch-making discovery began with Varley's ob- 
servations of the cathode rays wihch are given off at the 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 125 

cathode in a vacuum tube filled with a very dilute gas when 
electricity is passed through the tube. These cathode rays 
travel with great velocity from cathode to anode, and they 
carry a negative electrical charge. They are deflected in 
the same direction in a magnetic field as negatively charged 
particles. Thomson showed that cathode rays behave like 
negatively charged particles in an electrical field. Thomson 
called them "corpuscles." Johnstone Stoney named them 
"electrons." It has also been shown that the beta rays given 
off by radium are, in fact, nothing but electrons. The mass 
of the sub-atomic electrons remains practically constant at 
about (l-i-1845) of the mass of the hydrogen atom, pro- 
vided that the velocity remains within certain definite lim- 
its. Beyond the extreme limit the variation in the mass of 
the electron is marked, and experimental evidence has shown 
that the mass then increases with an increase in the velocity 
of the electron. 

To Kaufmann belongs the credit for this astounding dis- 
covery, which, in the hands of Thomson, gave us a new 
conception of matter. The startling fact is that the actual 
mass increase is exactly what it must he if the mass is 
entirely electromagnetic. The electronic particles are devi- 
ated by magnetic or electrical forces. The amount of this 
deviation, the charge transferred, and the heat developed 
constitute some of the basic data from which the mass of 
the electron is determined. In the Newtonian dynamics we 
have seen that force is the product of mass and acceleration 
under the supposition that the mass remains constant. For 
the electron the Newtonian law apparently holds good while 
the mass remains constant. The old expression must be so 
modified that it will provide for this variation in the mass. 
The old Newtonian expression involves one constant and 
one variable; the modified Newtonian expression must in- 
clude two variables. These radical discoveries have com- 
pletely effaced the dogma of a fixed and solid atom. The 
invariability of mass is gone forever. 

80. The Normal Materialization of the Concurrent System. 

Can the concurrent system be transformed into normal 

matter? In order to answer this question let us consider 

a simple device composed of a horseshoe magnet whose two 



126 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

branches culminate in a single cylindrical shaft very much 
like the shape of an ordinary tuning-fork. The cylindrical 
shaft is provided with a bearing in a vertical conducting 
support which is properly insulated from the base of the 
apparatus. A crank is attached to the end of the cylindrical 
shaft. Parallel to the ends of the horseshoe magnet we erect 
an iron plate in a vertical position, taking care to insulate 
this also from the common base of the device. A copper wire 
is connected with the iron plate. Another copper wire is con- 
nected with the conducting vertical support. Ordinarily 
we say that the iron plate opposite the magnet is mag- 
netized. Moreover, this induction reacts upon the magnet, 
apparently strengthening its magnetism. The positive and 
negative poles of the magnet produce respectively negative 
and positive poles in the plate. We assume that the space 
between the generated magnetic poles in the iron plates and 
the poles of the magnet contains the primary matter of the 
concurrent system. By the term "matter" we mean an 
action center or group of centers. An action center is a 
mass-acceleration center according to the force-center the- 
ory of Boscovich. Primary matter is capable of phase 
transformation. (This will be discussed in detail later.) 
By the expenditure of work primary matter can be trans- 
formed into secondary or normal matter. The electron is 
the unit of normal matter. The atom and molecule are 
aggregates of these normal matter units. 

Let us now connect the two copper wires, establishing 
a complete circuit through some device which will tell if a 
current of electricity is produced. Nothing happens. Now 
let us turn the crank of the magnet vigorously. The instant 
that we do this, something happens ; in fact, we produce an 
electric current which can be made to do many kinds of 
work. We observe further that effort is required to turn 
the crank just as if a resistive pressure were being applied 
to the shaft. When we cease turning the crank the electric 
current ceases. The magnet and the iron plate show no 
loss of material whatever, indicating that the current is not 
produced by modifications of that type. In fact, the electric 
current generated is due to the expenditure of energy in- 
volved in the turning of the crank against a resistance. 
Now the new school of science tells us that an electric cur- 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 127 

rent is merely a flow of electrons. It is incontrovertible that 
the expenditure of nothing but energy, in our device, has 
generated an electric current, which means a flow of elec- 
trons. Two questions will occur to us : (1) Did we actually 
make these electrons and also set them in action by expendi- 
ture of energy? (2) Did we merely set them in motion? Ac- 
cording to the new school, all matter is made from electrons, 
and an atom is a miniature solar system wherein the elec- 
trons are the planets. Perhaps the electrons which consti- 
tute the current of electricity are detached from the magnet 
and the iron plate, and the energy expended, in our device, is 
required to separate them from the iron atoms and to keep 
them in motion. If continuous work is to be done in the 
external circuit, a continuous flow of electrons must be 
maintained. This means the ultimate complete disintegra- 
tion and dissipation of the iron atoms, which is not borne 
out by fact. Unless there is some other source of supply 
of electrons, it would seem that our device actually converts 
energy into electrons. From the new viewpoint this is not 
alarming because it is conceded that the entire mass of the 
electron is of electrical origin. We can, then, take the 
position that every point in space exhibits, or is capable of 
exhibiting, a definite work or energy value, thus constitut- 
ing an interacting etherless system, able, under determinate 
conditions, to produce that change and transformation of 
energy which we call matter. Nothing of real import can 
be maintained against this view ; in fact, it must remain as 
the basic groundwork of any hypothesis which is to do jus- 
tice to physical action. However, the value of a physical 
model must not be underestimated because of the possibility 
which it provides for previsions and subsequent progressive 
corrections. 

The model of the concurrent system composed of primary 
matter must therefore be conceived as having already pres- 
ent within it partially developed energy manifestations 
located at positions compatible with ascertainable physical 
requirements. Interaction between the intrinsic energy of 
the concurrent system and the extrinsic energy associated 
with already developed matter groups may, then, produce 
amplification and more complete development of the energy 
factors of the concurrent system. 



128 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

81. The Monon. 

Indications point strongly to the conclusion that all phe- 
nomenal manifestations of energy ultimately prove to be of 
the kinetic order. From this standpoint our spatial back- 
ground is a chart of potential energy values in which kinetic 
energy of definite magnitude is manifest at definite positions 
or points. At such positions, then, we must locate our activ- 
ity of kinetic energy centers, which, for want of a definite 
name, we may call monons. We must ascribe to these 
monons such basic properties as form the fundamental 
requirements of possible matter. The monons, in addition 
to being energy, are potential normal matter. Therefore we 
assign to them the fundamental property or capacity of 
exhibiting resistance to that which tends to give them accel- 
eration; in other words, we attribute kinetic reaction to 
them as their basic phenomenal property. Since the concept 
of kinetic reaction includes the idea of resistance, we have at 
once the negative feature of our monon ; and since they are 
capable, through their own positive content of kinetic 
energy, of exhibiting interaction, we also attribute a positive 
nature to this ultimate element. Interaction requires the 
unified presence of both the negative and the positive nature 
in the monon, the former to insure its self-preservation and 
survival, the latter to provide for possible attractive mani- 
festations. This is, in fact, what interaction means, repul- 
sion and attraction, reaction and action, unified in the con- 
tent of the monon. We cannot conceive of the independent 
existence of either the negative or the positive function 
within the primary unity. Complexities built up of monons 
must behave in this twofold manner. Complexity does not 
prohibit unity : it is unity of a higher order ascending until 
consciousness is attained. The universe itself is the highest 
physical type of unity in complexity. 

Since kinetic reaction involves a possible mass coupled 
inseparably with a possible acceleration, we include these 
factors in the concept of the monon with full realization that 
mass and acceleration are naturally dependent variables 
capable of all the shades of variability from zero to a pos- 
sible maximum. Within certain critical values we may there- 
fore find that the variation of the mass is practically re- 
duced to its zero limits ; in other words, below this critical 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 129 

value the mass may appear to be maintained at a constant 
value. We do not, therefore, regard the monon as an abso- 
lutely fixed and unchanging ultimate. Moreover, as a cen- 
ter of static influence its scope of activity must include a 
maximum and minimum sphere within which limits expan- 
sion and contraction are possible. We look upon the monon 
as being capable of this form of pulsation between definite 
limits. The monon, then, is energy manifest within definite 
limits responsive to the general law of interaction. 

82. The Energosial or Concurrent System. 

The further development of our model requires that its 
kinetic energy be defined, in part, in terms of motion, for 
the reason that all physical phenomena are ultimately re- 
duced to terms of motion. This involves the existence of 
gyrational groups of monons. If our concurrent system, or 
energos (meaning "active" or *'in work"), is energy, it 
does not become necessary to think of the manner of the 
beginning of these gyrations, because they are merely one 
means of exhibiting this eternal energy. The maintenance 
of the gyration is no more the problem of science than the 
seeking for a cause or manner of the beginning. The con- 
tinuously given world involves the continuous presence of 
energy. The continuous maintenance of energy forces us to 
admit the immanence and transcendence of that activity 
principle known to philosophy as the Absolute and to the 
religious consciousness as God. If our model becomes a 
better interpreter of physical action by adding to it the 
idea of gyrational groups, then we must consider them also 
as continuously given because they are our mechanical sym- 
bol of an ever-present energy. This does not preclude vari- 
ations in the velocity and size of the gyrational orbit; in 
fact, this must be assumed if our model shall, even with 
partial success, portray physical action. Moreover, we must 
include the possibility of dismemberment of the groups, 
involving curvilinear and rectilinear motions of the dismem- 
bered centers. We do not desire, therefore, like Helmholtz 
and Kelvin, to maintain the eternal gyration of our groups. 
The condition of a group is not only due to self-determina- 
tion, but it is also dependent upon other interaction factors. 
The maintenance of the world is provided for in the con- 



130 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

tinuous manifestations of our concurrent system, the 
energos together with the conservation of those matter 
groups which we may regard as external to this system. 
This continuous manifestation is grounded in the concept 
of God. 

83. The Gyratory Energons. 

Gyratory Groups 
A rotary system composed of diametrically oppo- 
site monons constitutes our simplest gyratory group. In 
order to refer to this group type we shall call them energons. 
This name will suggest their origin in the "energosial" sys- 
tem. Far from the influence of disturbing matter groups, 
the diameter of the energons will be practically equal to 
each other and constant. If a body is free to move in a 
plane wherein the components of the activity intensities due 
to the external system, resolved along suitable reference 
axes, are equal to each other, then it will move in a circular 
orbit. If these component intensities are unequal, the 
orbit will be a conic section. The monons constituting 
the energon are therefore free to move in the same circular 
orbit if the component activity intensities of the system 
external to themselves are equal to each other. In other 
words, the nature of the orbit may be considered to be gov- 
erned by the external activity factors. We may look upon 
the result as a centripetal effect tending to maintain the 
monons in a constant radial relation to a common center. If 
we neglect the part played by the monons, our concept will 
be incomplete. The energon and the external system interact 
continuously. In this case, then, the role assigned to the mo- 
nons would be one of mutual repulsion, which, in reference 
to the external system, would constitute a centrifugal reac- 
tion. A central force would produce the same result both 
in respect to the type of the orbit and the action intensities, 
provided that the effect of the system external to the energon 
be totally disregarded. We cannot disregard the entire uni- 
verse for the sake of merely establishing the rotation of 
one of its groups, consequently we are forced to look upon 
the gyration as being due to the interaction of both the ex- 
ternal system and the energon as heretofore set forth. The 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 131 

external system would therefore exhibit an intensity of 
action equivalent to the kinetic reaction developed by the 
rotating energon. From another viewpoint, the reaction 
of the concurrent system is equivalent to the centrifugal 
force of the energon. The concurrent system and the gyrat- 
ing energon, therefore, exist in a condition of "dynamic equi- 
librium." An influx of energy, due to the action of a mate- 
rial group, into the energonic system would be in the nature 
of an increase in the centrifugal force causing an increase 
in the radius of the energon. 

84. The Birth of the Electron. 

Let us again refer to our current generator. First we 
must consider the role played by the constituent members of 
the device. From our present viewpoint we regard a mag- 
netic substance as capable of exhibiting exceptional perme- 
ability to the flow of energons. The process of magnetiza- 
tion consists in an axial alignment of the atoms constituting 
the substance. We regard the atom as composed of a large 
number of sub-atomic particles playing the role of planets 
in the atomic solar system. More precisely, we may think 
of the orbits as a series of rings or loci whose planes are 
parallel to each other and perpendicular to a common polar 
axis passing through the ring centers. The energons con- 
tinuously rotate during their passage around the ring loci 
orbits. The plane of an energon in the orbit is perpen- 
dicular to the ring locus tangent at every point in the locus. 
The distance between the rings is a potential function of 
energy of the rings. In other words, there is a definite 
potential difference between the rings, compatible with the 
maintenance of the atom as a comparatively stable struc- 
ture in an interacting system. This is also true of all sub- 
atomic groups and distances. In a magnetized substance 
the polar axes of the atoms have been aligned and energons 
may therefore invade such atoms with greater ease than in a 
non-magnetized substance. An iron disk, in the presence 
of a magnet, affects, and is affected by, the energonic dis- 
placement in the atoms of the magnet. If we drop a body 
into a vessel containing water, the level is displaced. Simi- 
larly by introducing a piece of iron into the field surround- 
ing a magnet we disturb the equilibrium of the field. The 



132 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

disturbance of the equilibrium is equivalent to increasing 
the stress in the concurrent system. This induces polariza- 
tion of the atoms constituting the iron disk. The normal 
distance between energonic rings is decreased, due to the 
intrusion of the iron disk. Furthermore, some of the ener- 
gonic rings invade the now polarized iron, thus tending 
to relieve the increased stress in the concurrent system. 
The tendency to relieve the congestion is concomitant with a 
further decrease in the ring distance which is equivalent to 
shortening the axial ring line through magnet and iron 
disk. This is accompanied by a tendency to translate the 
iron disk toward the magnet. The loci of the energonic ring 
centers constitute what we generally mean by a line of mag- 
netic force. These loci are merely spatial representations 
of the directional resultants of interaction. When we use the 
term "line of force" we mean that this significance only 
shall be attributed to it. 

From electromagnetics we know that if we lOok along 
a conductor in the direction in which the current is flowing, 
the lines of magnetic force around the conductor are in a 
clockwise direction. This means that the energonic rings 
travel in a clockwise manner in the orbits surrounding the 
conductor. While their centers advance along the lines of 
force (the loci of the moving centers constitute the lines of 
force) , the energons themselves rotate in a clockwise man- 
ner. For a reversal in the current direction the orbital 
motion is still clockwise in reference to the new current 
direction. This orbital direction will therefore be counter- 
clock-wise in reference to the previous rotation. 

The effect of an energy increment and an energy decre- 
ment in relation to the potential status of the energon must 
now be considered. Physical interaction demands that the 
energon be capable of passing through three phases or 
states. In the undisturbed concurrent system the phase is 
neutral, and for this state the magnitude of the intrinsic 
energy, the centrifugal force, and the radius of the elemen- 
tary system constitute determinants which define the 
energon in its neutral state. In fact, in the neutral phase 
the term "energon*' includes these determinants. An incre- 
ment of energy applied to the energon involves an increment 
in the determinants. A decrement of energy, similarly, in- 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 133 

volves a decrease in the determinants of the energon. There 
is a maximum and a minimum limit to the magnitude of 
the determinants, corresponding respectively to an incre- 
ment and a decrement of energy. The energonic system 
may change in a twofold manner from its neutral condition. 
The ascending process involves a definite work increment; 
the descending process involves an equal work decrement. 
The three phases, then, may be designated as the high, neu- 
tral, and low. Passing from high to neutral or from neutral 
to low is a descending process involving compression. If the 
change be in the reverse direction, we have an ascending 
process which involves expansion. The ultimate unit of 
work is that work which is involved in the change in phase 
of the energon from neutral to high or from neutral to low, 
irrespective of the direction in which the change takes place. 
The three phases involve two steps which may be traversed 
in either direction. Irrespective of direction, each step 
involves the same amount of work. The ascending and 
descending processes are inseparable in all phenomenal 
action. The development of an ultimate unit of work incre- 
ment involves the compensating appearance of an ultimate 
unit of work decrement. The energonic reactions therefore 
always involve a pair of energons. For the same reason 
molecules in solution are broken into couples. A unit of 
work increment applied to one energon involves the simul- 
taneous appearance of a unit of work decrement in another. 
The work expended along the ascending potential gradient is 
equal to the work stored along the descending potential 
gradient. 

In the high phase the energon becomes an electron. In 
the low phase the energon becomes a "positonJ' The word 
''positon" indicates that the energon exists in that phase 
which is the extreme of the electronic. Moreover, a negative 
charge is always associated with the free electron. We asso- 
ciate an equal positive charge with the positon. In the last 
analysis the magnitude of this negative and positive charge 
depends upon the work increment and its equivalent work 
decrement. Work expended is always equal and concomi- 
tant with work stored. 

Ions in solution exhibit these three phases in accordance 
with the precise phase change in the energon. In other 



134 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

words, the phase change in the energon is the factor which 
determines the phase of the ion. Since all interaction presup- 
poses the concomitance of both the ascending and the de- 
scending processes, it follows that the products of solution 
must appear as ionic pairs. An odd solution component 
cannot remain in solution. In this we have the real reason 
why molecules break down into so-called "ionic pairs." We 
cannot accept that contention of the electrolytic theory of 
dissociation which holds that the ionic pairs in solution are 
charged in an opposite electrical manner. 

85. The Electric Current as Transformed Mechanical Energy. 

Our concurrent system model is now sufficiently com- 
plete to test its usefulness not only in the interpretation of 
the phenomena connected with our little current generator, 
but also in the elucidation of electrolytically generated cur- 
rents. The author has also applied the model in the inter- 
pretation of the phenomenon of light. These applications 
of our model are discussed later in the text. 

Let us now consider what happens when we turn the 
crank of our generator. It is evident at once that we dis- 
turb the energonic axial force lines the moment the magnet 
is rotated. These energonic force lines form closed curves. 
The energy configuration offers resistance to the disturb- 
ing influence. The work done by the material group is of 
the nature of an ascending process, adding energy to the 
electronic groups, which expand and thus become electrons. 
For every electron thus formed in the concurrent system, 
involving the expenditure of an ultimate unit of work incre- 
ment, an energon is reduced to a positon, and an equivalent 
ultimate work unit is stored in the positon. Thus we have 
the ascending process concomitant with the descending 
process. The electron can again become a neutral energon 
by having an ultimate unit of work done upon it. Similarly, 
the positon can give up its stored ultimate work unit and 
again become a neutral energon. Hence work can be done 
in some material group system. The elecron, being at the 
high phase, can do no more work within certain critical 
velocity values, and it may therefore be regarded as nega- 
tive. The positon, however, is positive in its ability to do 
work, for work has been stored in its production. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 135 

As the energon, due to the influx of external energy, 
becomes an electron, the surrounding concurrent system is 
subjected to expansion. Equilibrium in the concurrent sys- 
tem is restored by the formation of one positon for every 
electron generated. The equilibrium within the magnet itself 
is disturbed. As an energon expands into an electron it is 
displaced out of the magnet into the concurrent system. 
Simultaneously, a positon, concomitantly generated, passes 
through the electron into the magnet. This process is con- 
tinuous while energy is expended in turning the crank of 
the machine. A stream of electrons moves along the new 
resultant force lines into the iron disk and thence into the 
conducting wire and the external circuit. Simultaneously, 
a stream of positons moves, at the same rate, in the opposite 
direction through the magnet and into the external circuit 
by way of the conductor. The positon is ready to give up 
its stored work to the external system and thus become 
once more an energon. At the same time an equal amount 
of work is done upon the electron by the external system 
transforming it also into an energon. The little current gen- 
erator is therefore an energy transformer. It manufactures 
electrons and positons out of energons. 

86. Primary and Secondary Matter in the Role of Concurrent 
and Excitant Systems. 
Primary matter may, then, be regarded as activity 
groups arranged in conformity with the demands of inter- 
action. The definite locations and phases of action of these 
centers depend upon the magnitude of the interaction at any 
given moment of time. Space, then, is merely a chart of 
apprehension which gives only relative meaning to activity 
manifestations. This also is true of time. Instead of space 
being a genuine reality which isolates the centers from each 
other and thus constitutes a barrier to physical action, 
space is merely a relative interpreter of the intensity of the 
interaction. Since the energy phase is our broadest physical 
concept pertaining to the activity content, we may think of 
these activity centers as localized energy. However, local- 
ized energy does not mean that the activity of these centers 
is accounted for by the mere word "energy," because the 
word "energy" signifies only a phase of that activity which 



136 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

owes its beginning and maintenance to God the Creator. 
Secondary or normal matter is merely transformed pri- 
mary matter. In certain phenomena the elementals of sec- 
ondary matter, like the electron, serve as excitant systems, 
which, in conjunction with the concurrent system^ account 
for such manifestations as the phenomena of light and 
electricity. 

87. Space Not Unreal. 

Space is not a thing. Thought is not a thing. It does 
not follow that, because space and thought are not things, 
both have no reality. Because space is a form of finite 
apprehension, it does not follow that space is unreal. Like 
other types of finite reality, space is not independent. It is 
a form interdependent with reality. Space arises, as it 
were, out of interaction. As a form of apprehension or 
awareness it pertains to the knowing and perceiving con- 
scious subject. Objectively it finds its significance in the 
interdependent activities manifest in the physical universe. 
Psychologically, the space form is a temporal genesis. 
Because of the fact of interaction between subject and 
object, the space form is general and not particular, and 
an a priori science of geometry is possible. Space is not 
an X which holds things in definite positions and keeps them 
either together or apart. The apartness and nearness of 
things are due, on the contrary, to an interdependent inter- 
action. The separateness of things is due to the activity of 
things, and its magnitude is measured in spatial terms. We 
apprehend this separateness in terms of the space form and 
measure its magnitude in terms of distance. 

88. Extension. 

Since the space forms originate in interaction, the occu- 
pation of space is due primarily to the activity of things. 
The "how much?" of space occupation is answered by the 
"this much" of activity. Extension, therefore, is a form of 
action. It is a "this much" of action. Extension, however, 
is only one of many ways of measuring the amount or mag- 
nitude of an action. Consequently, it is merely one phase 
of activity. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 137 

89. Primary and Secondary Causes. 

Reality is ultimately divided into an Absolute Reality 
and a relative reality, God and His created cosmos. In the 
rationally ordered physical universe the relationships be- 
tween its members are intelligible in terms of space, time, 
and causation. The physical universe is a complete unitary 
system which differentiates itself into a temporal series of 
events appearing as antecedents and consequents. Causes 
and effects as known in the complete relativity system of 
the cosmos constitute what we have previously designated 
as secondary causes. The universe of physical action is 
causal and deterministic. The physical world is a world of 
uniformities and natural laws. The secondary causes are 
describable in terms of natural laws. Our own conscious 
activity is non-causal in the sense of natural law. We origi- 
nate, and consequently our activity is in the nature of a 
"free cause." Our freedom is exercised within the limits of 
a causal and deterministic world order. The freedom of 
the Absolute is above these limitations. God's freedom is 
beyond the realm of secondary causation. Cause and effect 
in the sense of secondary causation are of God but not in 
God. We originate in a world of restrictions and limita- 
tions. Consequently our originations are of relative value 
and meaning. Our free originations and acts are brought 
into conformity with the deterministic mandates of environ- 
ment by the inflexible coercion of experience. God's origi- 
nation is Absolute and above all limitations. Our freedom is 
like God's, but only in part. An act or origination is our 
own free act, but its form is limited by the deterministic 
order of the physical universe. God's origination is free in 
an Absolute sense because it is above the unitary relativity 
system. God's free origination is therefore the only true 
primary causation. The being of God is a Transcendent 
Being free from the limits of relativity. We attribute the 
creation of the cosmos to the primary causation of God. 

90. Physical Proof of the Transcendence of God. 

The interpretation of the physical universe as a unitary 
relativity system results in an inert mechanical model. If 
we think of the physical universe as a fragment of a great 
all, unknown in part, then we have pantheism. If we con- 



138 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

sider the universe as created by, but independent of, God 
then we have deism. Contemplating the world as a self- 
sufficient given, self-operative, and uncreated Godless sys- 
tem, we arrive at the position of materialism or atheism. 
Deism, atheism, and pantheism involve an inert mechanical 
model despite the supposed differences in the three positions. 
We have shown in paragraph 24 that the ultimate poten- 
tial difference in the physical universe is maintained by 
God. Consequently the positions of deism and atheism are 
both untenable. Pantheism is merely deism raised to the 
nth power; it is an all-inclusive deism. The pantheistic 
"all" is no more maintainable within itself than the deistic 
or atheistic universe. The physical model of the pantheist 
is just as inert and inoperative as the deistic and atheistic 
model. It follows that a Being must exist independently of 
the physical universe, upon whom the cosmos depends for 
its continuous existence. Thus we arrive at a proof of the 
Transcendence of God. 

91. Transcendence and Immanence. 

It may be maintained that we have arrived at a repul- 
sive dualism. We contend that the mere word "dualism" 
is no more repugnant than the word "monism." Incon- 
sistency is the only justifiable cause of intellectual repug- 
nancy. The objection may be raised that we have divided 
the totality of reality T into two parts, A, the Absolute 
Reality of God, and S the cosmic reality of the unitary rela- 
tivity system. The relation, expressed mathematically, 
takes the form 

T = A+S = A+y{a, b, c, R) =A+/iUnityl. 

The unity of all reality established by the pantheist and 
the monist is merely a unity of multiplicity. The unity of the 
physical universe which we hold as a fundamental truth is 
a unity of multiplicity. The unity of the conscious self is 
a unity of conscious states. The unity of the monon is a 
unity of numerous phases, states, and qualities constituting 
a physical character content. Therefore all forms of reality 
exhibit a unity which is unintelligible without multiplicity. 
A unity which does not partake of multiplicity is merely a 
mathematical abstraction having no other significance. A 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 139 

real unity, possessing a content, consequently is not a mere 
mathematical abstraction. Relatedness is the norm of 
unity. It is evident that the very idea conveyed by the 
term "relatedness" suggests multiplicity. The relatedness 
between mere numbers is nothing more than a mathematical 
abstraction. The type of the unity depends upon the kind 
of relatedness. We draw a sharp distinction between unity 
and identity. God and His created world are not identities. 
A relationship exists between God and the cosmos. It does 
not therefore follow that the cosmos and God are identical. 
Immanence and transcendence constitute the form of the 
relatedness between God and the world. This type of related- 
ness defines the form of the unity existing between the 
Divine Being and His created world. This type of unity does 
not signify identity. In the physical universe thing A is not 
identical with thing B, Nevertheless a relationship exists 
between thing A and thing B as well as between things A 
and B and the rest of the physical universe. Thing A is 
not therefore identical with thing B nor with the remaining 
things in the universe. God is not isolated from His created 
world. We have seen that ultimately the physical universe 
depends upon God for its continuous maintenance. God is 
the prime and ultimate sustaining cause of the physical uni- 
verse. In the cosmos the imprint of God's Omnipotence and 
Omniscience is seen in secondary causation which guaran- 
tees order and uniformity in the physical universe. How- 
ever, mere secondary causation is incapable of rendering 
the world intelligible. God must also be Transcendent, but 
not isolated from the universe. We have fathomed but a 
fragment of the causal nexus. The ultimate relationship 
between God and the universe is and ever will be a mystery 
to finite consciousness. Nevertheless, a real relationship 
must exist if we hope to interpret even a mere fragmentary 
portion of God's created work. Since God is not isolated 
from the universe. He may reveal Himself in time in a man- 
ner inexplicable to finite consciousness because of our lim- 
ited and finite understanding of the profundities of the rela- 
tionships which manifest in the cosmos. Because of our 
finiteness these Revelations may appear as nodes in the cas- 
ual nexus. Because of our limited knowledge these nodes 
may be inexplicable in terms of uniformity. If this world 



140 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

is nothing more than a machine, then uniformity is absolute. 
If our conscious life is merely mechanical, then free origi- 
nation is impossible. Our conscious life is more than mere 
mechanism, consequently nodes of origination are possible. 
It does not follow that these nodes are therefore irrational. 
A nodal conscious life may upset the traditions of uni- 
formity because of a deeper and more profound system of 
relationships. From the standpoint of uniformity, the in- 
ventive achievements of conscious life may appear to be 
miraculous. Since God is not estranged from the universe, 
His temporal revelations may appear as miraculous nodes 
when compared with physical uniformity. The mathe- 
matical law of a curve may include nodal points which 
break in, as it were, upon the general uniformity. For this 
reason the nodes are not unreal. From the Infinite view- 
point the revelations acquire a relatedness to the world 
order of deeper significance than mere mechanical uniform- 
ity. Since God is not isolated from the world, but is Imma- 
nent in it, His primary causation may deflect the general 
uniformities of secondary causation into nodes inexplic- 
able to our limited, finite knowledge of the physical causal 
nexus. Such deflections, however, are in complete harmony 
with the deeper significance of reality. They are a fuller 
and more complete expression of reality in its ultimate 
meaning, and as such are in full accord with the principle of 
non-contradiction which unifies both primary and secondary 
causation. God, the Absolute, is the Infinite Perfection 
inspiring the imperfect. God is the unity of all truth. The 
fundamental characteristic of the Being of God is non-con- 
tradiction. The principle of non-contradiction actuates the 
physical universe and unifies primary and secondary cau- 
sation. The general physical uniformities, known as naU 
ural laws, are fragmentary expressions of the all-inclusive 
principle of non-contradiction which demands the Imma- 
nent activity of God in such revelations as insure the realiza- 
tion of purpose and teleology in His created universe. These 
revelations are in strict conformity with the principle of 
non-contradiction which is the essence of the Being of God. 
When viewed from the standpoint of the fragmentary nat- 
ural laws these revelations may appear as miracles, but 
from the standpoint of the all-inclusive principle of non- 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 141 

contradiction they complete and harmonize the intent of 
reality. It should be evident that our position differentiates 
itself in a marked manner from the pantheistic, monistic, 
deistic and atheistic positions. In order that the distinction 
may be readily apparent, we resort to the shorthand of 
mathematics. In the above we have represented the totality 
of reality T by the following expression : 

T=A+S 

in which A is the Absolute Reality of God, and S is the 
reality of the cosmos. The various positions mentioned 
above may be represented as follows : 

I. Pantheism, 

Tr=:Ar=S. 

The totality T is identical and equal to the reality of God, 
or it is equal and identical with the cosmos. In other words, 
the cosmos and God are identical. The fallacy of this posi- 
tion has been pointed out in the preceding. 

II. Monism, 

T=A=:S. 

This formula is the same as for the pantheistic position. 
The monist may try to deny that he is a pantheist. With 
subtle verbosity he may try to create a distinction, but in 
the last analysis his formula reduces to the pantheistic. 
Monism is nothing more than a modernized pantheism. 

III. Deism, 

. T=:A + S. 

The totality of reality T is divided into two distinct and 
independent parts ; that is, the Absolute A and the cosmos 
S, created by God but independent of God. The cosmos is 
sufficient unto itself and does not need the existence of 
God for its maintenance. The fallacy of this position has 
already been noted. If S is merged into A, or A into S, 
then the deistic position becomes identical with pantheism 
or monism. 



142 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

IV. Atheism or Materialism, 

The totality of reality consists of the cosmos only. 
There is no God. All is mere matter and energy. This is 
the fallacious position of atheism and materialism. 

It is clearly evident that pantheism, monism, and athe- 
ism, in the last analysis, are practically identical positions. 
There can be very little real distinction between the two 
statements, (1) that God is the cosmos, and (2) that the 
cosmos is the only existing God. Such apparent distinctions 
as are drawn are mere subtle sophistries. A mechanical 
model constructed upon the above outlined positions is inop- 
erative. Deism fails totally in this respect because of its 
absolute isolation of God and the cosmos. 

The results of scientific research, when properly inter- 
preted, therefore force us to the theistic position as the 
only philosophical system which conforms with the results 
of the scientific method. The facts of science, when driven 
to consistent conclusions, force us beyond the relativity sys- 
tem of the physical universe to the Being of God in accord- 
ance with the philosophy of theism. 

V. Scientific Theism. 

T=A+/(a). 
In the philosophy of Scientific Theism we look upon the 
totality of reality as consisting of the Absolute Reality of 
God, A and the dependent cosmos a. The cosmos a is of God 
through the act of creation, but it is not God. Nevertheless, 
the cosmos a depends continuously upon God for its main- 
tenance ; hence we may say mathematically that a, the cos- 
mos, is a function / (a) of God. In this manner we repre- 
sent, in the shorthand of mathematics, the truth of both 
Transcendence and Immanence. The principle of non-con- 
tradiction is of the Being of God and in the being of the 
cosmos, first, through His act of creation, and, second, 
through His Immanence and Revelation. Primary free 
causation and secondary causation are harmonized in the 
all-inclusive principle of non-contradiction. The principle 
of non-contradiction manifests purposively and teleologi- 
cally in the universe. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 143 

92. Purpose and Teleology. 

Mechanism and natural law in the sense in which we have 
defined them are compatible with spontaneity, individuality, 
purpose, and teleology. As a mere machine the cosmos is 
inert, and there is no room for spontaneity and teleology. 
Uniformity means that every change is understandable as 
a variation in a rational system. Purpose implies that there 
are further adjustments necessary, more contradictions 
which must be resolved before harmonic relations with 
reality can be established. A purpose is right only in so 
far as it is in harmony with reality. The realization of a 
purpose means that conditions have been brought into con- 
formity with the divine principle of non-contradiction. Con- 
sequently we may say that purpose is the intent of reality 
deferred in time. As far as the finite mind is concerned, 
purpose is no guarantee of value. When we have a vision 
of the whole, then we can discern the ideal which shapes 
the future. The future content is the result of the working 
of the ideal. The accidental is given fundamental impor- 
tance in modern scientific thought. According to this hy- 
pothesis, a plant is an accidental by-product of the activities 
of elements which contained nothing in their individual 
nature or in their relationships that involved the slightest 
certainty that a plant would evolve. Such an hypothesis 
verges on the ridiculous and makes knowledge impossible. 
There is no valid reason why the accident hypothesis should 
be applied to the organic world only. If it is true, then it 
would be difficult indeed to assign a reason why it is not 
equally true in the inorganic world. From another stand- 
point, if there is some form of teleology assignable to 
organic phenomena, then that same form must be inclusive 
of inorganic and conscious phenomena. There must be 
teleology below, in, and above con^cioitsness. The mathe- 
matical probability that accident could have brought about a 
cosmos is nil. Accident is the father of chaos, and intelli- 
gent, productive relationship is the father of cosmos. What 
we do find in the world is an unfoldment of an immanent 
reality. The plan of the plant was immanent in the entire 
and complete interaction of the universe. The plant did its 
part, environment did the rest, and between both there ex- 
isted that perfect understanding which only God could give 



144 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

to His created cosmos. The molding of the structure of 
the body or organism in the earlier phases of development 
cannot be ascribed to an inherent conscious knowledge exist- 
ing in the earlier phases ; it must rather be sought in the 
deeper inherent and hidden God-given endowment of the 
environment. 

The great movements of civilization, the development of 
religions, of ideas, and of art find no counterpart in a plan 
existing in a finite mind. Finite consciousness plays its part 
in the deposition of the strata of civilization, but no finite 
mind ever grasped the significance of the grand totality, and 
consequently, as far as the great movements are concerned, 
finite mind is unconscious of the intricacies and multiplicity 
of its ramifications. There is intelligence in every step, but 
it is of an immanent order hidden deeper in the mystery of 
things than finite eye can perceive. This immanence points 
clearly to a Being Transcenednt and above the physical 
order. Without Transcendence this immanence is inexplic- 
able. The great movements are typical of a teleology above 
consciousness. In this we have another proof of God's 
Transcendence. Teleology finds its real meaning in indi- 
viduality and completeness, which constitute the supreme 
essence of cosmic value, and as a finite conscious striving 
it is a temporal desire for harmony with reality. In this 
manner, then, does the principle of non-contradiction force 
imperfection toward perfection along the stream of contra- 
diction and unrest. 



CHAPTER VI 

Non-Newtonian Dynamics 

93. The True Relation Between Statics and Dynanucs. 

If we regard space as a chart of potential values, then 
the behavior of a particle or mass aggregate is determined 
by its own work value interacting with the other work 
values in the field. Space, then, is a field of activity values. 
Interaction between activity centers is describable in terms 
of the dynamics of motion. For purposes of analysis we 
may set up an instantaneous dynamics which then becomes 
our only true statics. The hypothetical cessation of activity 
and the recording of the instantaneous activity tendencies 
which obtain at any particular instant constitute what we 
call statics. When we equilibrate the instantaneous ten- 
dencies by the introduction of suitable factors, then we 
have cases of ordinary statics as met with in the science 
of mechanics. These instantaneous activity tendencies may 
be conveniently considered as stresses in the interaction 
fields. A particle when unrestrained by the hypothetical 
cessation of interaction, upon the removal of the hypotheti- 
cal restriction will be displaced in complete accord with the 
deduced instantaneous activity tendencies. It will move 
with definite velocity in that particular path which the inter- 
acting activity tendencies dictate. From our viewpoint 
statics is an instantaneous and consequently hypothetical 
or potential dynamics. Statics is dynamics viewed from the 
hypothetical limiting case of arrested motion or zero veloci- 
ties. Statics is an analytical convenience by means of which 
the future behavior of a system may be predicted. Mathe- 
matics is neither statical nor dynamical. The mere inser- 
tion of the letter V, meaning velocity, and the letter A, indi- 
cating acceleration, does not create dynamics out of mathe- 
matics. If activity were not the essense of reality, then 
mathematics could not be a means of representing dynami- 
cal relations. Conversely, since activity is the essence of 

145 



146 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

reality, it follows that the introduction of instantaneous 
statics does not cause the cessation of dynamical activity. 
Therefore we may pass from instantaneous statical rela- 
tions to dynamical relations, with the certainty that we are 
not violating the true principles of dynamical activity. Con- 
sequently if we have investigated the instantaneous, and 
therefore statical, conditions of a plane in space, we have 
correctly ascertained the conditions governing the subse- 
quent motion of any particular system assigned to the plane. 
For these reasons we reserve the right to proceed in this 
manner whenever the requirement of a particular analysis 
demands the use of this method. Moreover, since space is 
a chart of potential or work values, the investigation of the 
instantaneous conditions in a field enables us to develop the 
dynamics of a system in conformity with what we may term 
the stress conditions of the field. By stress conditions in a 
field or plane we mean the instantaneous activity condi- 
tions tending to the production of motion. The curvilinear 
or rectilinear resultant arising from such an investigation 
constitutes the resultant path of motion of the system as- 
signed to the field. The true relation between statics and 
dynamics is therefore emphasized in the Space-Time Poten- 
tial. Since every relative point in space has a relative work 
value, our system is fundamentally dynamical. The 
dynamics of the Space-Time Potential is essentially Non- 
Newtonian. 

94. Non-Newtonian Dynamics. 

We retain in our Non-Newtonian Dynamics the funda- 
mental relations pertaining to motion, force, and work. For 
reasons given later we abandon the Newtonian relation 

f -2 ) and adopt its anti-differential, that is, / — ^^^ be- 
cause of its direct relation to the fundamental relations 
pertaining to motion, force, and work. Moreover, we sub- 
stitute the anti-differential because of the fact that it makes 
possible a complete unification of statics, dynamics, atomic 
dynamics, ultra-atomic dynamics, thermodynamics, the 
theory of light and electricity. The innovation is justified 
not alone by the resulting unification and simplification, but 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 147 

by the fact that our system becomes philosophically defen- 
sible and consistent. In our Non-Newtonian Dynamics we 
require no constants to bridge the discrepancies between 
ultra-atomic dynamics and the dynamics of material aggre- 
gates. The observed relations of physical astronomy are 
derived from the Newtonian relation by resorting to un- 
justifiable limitations. Without these unjustifiable limita- 
tions, Nevd;on could not have derived the Keplerian Laws. 
Coulomb's relation is subject to the same criticism. The uni- 
versality of the Newtonian relation must be abrogated 
whenever we desire to apply it to a definite system. 

95. Critical Analysis of the Newtonian Relation. 

The Newtonian deductions concerning planetary motion 
depend upon the fundamental assumption that the distance 
s between two centers (sun and earth, for example) varies ; 
then it is shown that the type of the orbits (conic sections) 
depends upon the special form of the expression for velocity. 
Now if the distance s varies in a given time, then naturally 
the velocity must vary. Since a mass variation is excluded 
in the assumption upon alleged physical grounds, it is main- 
tained that the phenomenon is solely due to a distance vari- 
ation. The masses of both the earth and the sun are sup- 
posed to remain constant, hence the distance variation is 
the only condition which affects the problem. If the dis- 
tance s did not vary, the application of the differential cal- 
culus would produce a result equal to zero, for the differ- 
ential coefficient of a constant is zero. The retort is that the 
distance s actually does vary, hence we have the right to 
apply the differential calculus to the problem. We admit 
that astronomical observations show conclusively that the 
variation in the distance s takes place, but we contend that 
the calculus creates no physical reason for the variation. 
All that we get out of the procedure is the fact that if there 
is a variation in the distance s, then there is a variation in 
the velocity of the planetary body and the type of the orbit 
depends upon the nature of the velocity variation. This in 
itself is nothing astounding. A layman, not conversant with 
the calculus, would arrive at the same conclusion. The 
crux of the problem is in the variation of s, the distance 
between the central body and its satellite. The following 



148 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

question is here pertinent : Is the change in velocity of the 
satellite due to a change in the distance s, or is the change 
in the distance s due to a change in the velocity of the satel- 
lite ? It may be replied that our question is a mere trick of 
sophistry and that the fact is that the satellite arrives 
within the sphere of influence of the central body with 
a definite initial velocity. After this arrival, the gov- 
erning influence of the central body begins. We main- 
tain that this reply evades the question. Moreover, we 
hold that the question is pertinent. The reply suggests 
another question. Where does the sphere of influence of 
the central body begin, and when may we state that the 
satellite has "arrived"? According to Newton, the grav- 
itational effect extends throughout the universe ad infinitum. 
The line of demarcation which bounds the sphere of influ- 
ence of the central body must consequently be coincident 
with the resultant locus arising from the mutual action 
between the central body and the remaining totality of the 
universe. It is assumed that the mass of the central body 
remains constant. Therefore the behavior of the satellite 
when it reaches this line of demarcation must be governed 
by the conditions which pertain to the remaining totally of 
the universe. The mutual action between the central body 
and the rest of the universe defines the locus of demarcation, 
but since the central mass is constant the subsequent be- 
havior of the satellite depends upon the rest of the universe. 
It is evident that the governing conditions in the rest of the 
cosmos may be of a constant or a variable nature. If they 
are constant, then the locus resultant must depict a path 
conformable with a constant velocity, that is, a circle. If 
the governing conditions in the rest of the physical universe 
persist in variability, then the locus will be a curve which 
conforms with this variation. If the variation is pulsating 
and periodic, then the locus may be a conic of the elliptic 
form. The variation in the rest of the universe may involve 
changes in position or mass magniture, or both. The initi- 
ation of this variation cannot be ascribed to anything or any 
source within the system itself. It must be due to an agency 
outside of the system. Consequently the Newtonian impli- 
cations force us to the concept of a Transcendent God. If 
resort is made to an infinite time, then the variations in 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 149 

the rest of the universe would long ago have ceased. The 
cosmic system would then have had an inlinite time within 
which to equilibrate itself. The clock of the universe cannot 
wind itself, for there is no perpetual motion extant within 
the universe. Continuous activity ultimately depends upon 
the continuous maintenance of a potential difference within 
the physical universe. We have already proved that God 
only can maintain this potential difference. Returning to 
the question concerning the relation between a change in 
the distance s and the change in velocity, we realize fully 
that the form of the question is repulsive to the physicist. 
He will maintain that the change in velocity inevitably 
involves a change in s, the distance, and conversely that a 
change or variation in the distance s with equal certainty 
involves a variation in the velocity. We hold that this con- 
tention of the physicist is a sophism par excellence. Most 
assuredly the contention is true because it is a mere state- 
ment of identity. Nothing is contained in the one idea that 
is not already contained in the other. If the distance s 
varies, then the velocity varies ; and if the velocity varies, 
then s, the distance, varies. The intent of our question is 
to discover the nature of the potent condition which is 
capable of bringing about a change or variation in either 
the distance s or the velocity of the satellite. No one will 
maintain that the distance s is a potent agency which is 
capable of changing itself to something other than itself. 
It follows that the change in the distance s is a mere accom- 
paniment, though inevitable, of the variation in the velocity. 
We have seen that the masses of the central body and the 
satellite have nothing to do with the variation because they 
are constant. Be it understood that this is the Newtonian 
position. From our viewpoint these two masses interact 
with the rest of the universe, and therefore, whether con- 
stant or variable, they are not impotent factors in the phe- 
nomena. Following the Newtonian assumptions to their 
inevitable conclusion, we must admit that the variation in the 
velocity of the satellite is due to the rest of the universe and 
not to the masses considered. Newton's development of the 
Keplerian Laws, however, ignores the rest of the universe. 
Only the grossly biased and obstinate worshipers of mathe- 
matical legerdemain can persist in the contention that the 



150 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

Newtonian procedure is sound and justifiable. The New- 
tonian implications force us to admit interaction. If we 
are to develop the planetary orbits consistently we must not 
ignore the great remainder of the universe for the sake of 
two comparatively insignificant bodies like the sun and the 
earth. Consistent analysis therefore demands that we 
attack the problems of physical astronomy by introducing 
a two-directional stress system into the plane of the orbit. 
A full account of minor perturbations requires a three- 
directional system. The plane of the orbit is regarded as 
of unlimited extent, therefore all the activity factors within 
this plane are included in the analysis. For circular orbits 
we consider the stress components as being equal ifi magni- 
tude. For a two-directional system of unequal intensities 
the orbits will be conic sections other than the circle. The 
relative magnitude of the stress intensities controls the type 
of the orbit. When we proceed in this manner the expres- 
sion for the orbit will involve the stress intensities, and 
therefore type dependence will be directly related in our 
expression to these intensities. In other words, our expres- 
sion will include a genuine physical activity relation capable 
of accounting for the modifications of the orbits. We have 
seen that the mere inclusion of the velocity in the New- 
tonian expression constitutes no real physical reason for 
these modifications. The ultimate maintenance of the stress 
intensities depends upon the Being of God. For us science 
is a record of the facts of the physical universe, ascertained 
experimentally and representing, in the final analysis, the 
active thought of God. 

96. Further Difficulties of the Newtonian Contention. 

Since the time of the battle royal between the Newton- 
ians and the Cartesians, the Newtonian formula has reigned 
supreme in the scientific world. The Newtonian formula, 
possessing the quality of simplicity when contrasted with 
the Cartesian vortex motion in a frictionless fluid, beat 
down opposition by the sheer force of its simplicity. Be 
it noted, however, that the Cartesian development gives the 
Keplerian Laws as a mathematical consequence ;with even 
greater ease than the Newtonian formula. We mention this 
fact in order to show that the Newtonian formula is not 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 151 

the only method whereby the Keplerian relations may be 
developed. This misconception seems to be general with 
those who are not familiar with the history of physical 
mathematics. For this reason the finality of the Newtonian 
position has been accepted as practically self-evident. Since 
the pendulum of thought in the time of Newton was swing- 
ing away from the fluid motion, the Newtonian formula 
gained the ascendancy. The writer bears the most profound 
reverence for the great work which Newton gave to the 
world. Not very many years ago he was one of those who 
ardently maintained that the Newtonian Law of Gravitation 
was the one generalization in the history of scientific ad- 
vancement which would withstand the attack of future gen- 
erations. The Newtonian concept gave him such profound 
satisfaction that he cherished hopes that it was an expres- 
sion which would ultimately explain all phenomena of 
interaction, including in its domain the activities of mole- 
cules, atoms, and electrons as known to chemistry, electro- 
chemistry and electricity. The electrical law that attrac- 
tions and repulsions are commensurate with the product 
of the charges and inversely commensurate with the square 
of the distance between them, seemed to him to be but a 
further extension of the Newtonian generalization which 
dealt only with attractions. At the seventh general meeting 
of the American Electrochemical Society, held at Boston, 
April 25, 26 and 27, 1905, he read a paper entitled "The 
Interdependence of the Atomic Weights and the Electro- 
chemical Equivalents" (Transactions of the American 
Electrochemical Society) , in which he calculated the charge 
on an electron from the standpoint of compressive work 
done on a spherical shell. Not being able to reconcile his 
own view with that of physics, which maintained that the 
Newtonian expression is inapplicable to molecular, atomic, 
and electronic conditions, he endeavored to bridge the gap 
between gravitation and electricity before giving the above- 
mentioned article its final form. Failing in this attempt at 
absolute unification of the two phenomena under the law 
of inverse squares, he abandoned the solution, for the time 
being, with this statement: "Gravitational and electrical 
mass may then be regarded as the two aspects in which 
mass manifests itself to us. On the one hand we have at- 



152 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

tractions, kinetic energy, absorption, and integration; on 
the other hand we have repulsions, potential energy, self- 
conservation, and differentiation; yet these are merely the 
two modes in which actual mass interaction takes place." 

The reason for the failure lay in his absolute confidence 
in the Nev^onian law of gravitation which involves the 
product of the masses and the inverse square of the distance. 
If we assume that, whatever may be the final form of the 
expression which relates activities associated with mass 
aggregates, that same expression is also capable of describ- 
ing the magnitude of the activities pertaining to the ulti- 
mate constituent mass particles, we are within the realm 
of the reasonable and rational. If the counter-assertion is 
made that the Newtonian law of inverse squares holds for 
mass aggregates, but does not hold for the mass constitu- 
ents, this in itself is not a sufficient reason for abandoning 
the above-outlined postulate, because the law of inverse 
squares may not be a correct statement of the magnitude of 
the involved activities. Consequently we propose to retain 
this postulate, reserving its proof for a more appropriate 
place in our discussion. 

The remarkable discrepancy and difference in 
the behavior of electronic particles and mass ag- 
gregates under the Newtonian formula is brought 
startlingly before us when we consider the fact 
that the repulsion of two electrons is more than 
10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 
= 10*^ times greater than the attractive force according to 
the gravitational formula. If we consider the repulsive 
force exerted between one gram of pure negative elec- 
tricity and another gram distant one centimeter, we ob- 
tain the enormous value of 320,000,000,000,000,000,000,- 
000,000.0=3.2x10'" tons. Moreover, the phenomenon of 
repulsion itself is foreign to the notion of gravitation, which 
deals only with attractions. Furthermore, the startling dis- 
covery that the so-called mass of the electron is not a fixed 
quantity, but a variable magnitude depending upon the velo- 
city in such a manner that the apparent mass increases with 
an increase in velocity, places the old notions of matter oper- 
ating according to the gravitational formula in a precarious 
position. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 153 

We shall now point out further anomalies in the New- 
tonian expression. In nature mass increase is produced by 
addition — and not by multiplication, as in the gravitational 
formula — and the resultant associated activities are sums 
and not products. Mechanics, dealing with force relations, 
finds thom additive in their resultant effects and not com- 
mensurate with the result obtained by multiplication. In 
this respect, therefore, the Newtonian formula places itself 
in flagrant opposition to observed facts. Furthermore, the 
formula asserts that the force depends not only upon the 
product of the masses, but upon an inverse ratio of the sec- 
ond power of the distance. This latter assumption no doubt 
had its origin in the geometric spatial analogy of a system of 
concentric shells having the center of force emanation as 
their common center. What interpretation, then, shall be 
given to the term "force"? If the emanating force is a 
radiating, flowing substance, then as a definite quantity 
spreads itself uniformly over the surface of successive con- 
centric spherical shells, it is reasonable to suppose that the 
quantity of the emanating fluid force per unit of area will 
stand in an inverse ratio to the squares of the radii of suc- 
cessive shells because their areas increase as the squares of 
the respective radii. This involves us at once in a number of 
difficulties. In the first place, the motion of the emanating 
fluid force must be explained. This would necessitate the 
existence, at the center of emanation, of an auxiliary repel- 
lant force capable of sending the fluid force outward in 
radial directions. Secondly, what becomes of the diffused 
emanating fluid force if it is not fortunate enough to become 
attached to an object? Thirdly, is the supply of the ema- 
nating force, located at the center of emanation, unlimited 
in its available quantity? Fourthly, even if all these perti- 
nent queries could be answered satisfactorily, granting that 
the fluid force has arrived at its goal, an object, by what 
mechanism can it produce motion in the body? Fifthly, 
what is to determine the direction of the imparted motion ? 

Returning to the conception of a system of spherical 
shells, we see that the Newtonian formula is analogous to 
the case of a fluid force dissipating itself over the surface of 
a sphere and consequently experiencing a decrease in its 



154 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

density proportionate to the inverse squares of the radii of 
successive spheres. The intensity of the effect felt at a 
point on any successive shell is, according to this notion, 
directly proportional to the density of the fluid force upon 
the particular shell. No proof has ever been produced to 
substantiate this implication of the Newtonian conception. 
Force has never been shown to be an emanating fluid, and 
if this could be proved it would still be necessary to account 
for the fact that the fluid force makes no distinction between 
vacuum and matter. It dissipates itself over the entire 
spherical surface with mathematical precision, irrespective 
of the presence or absence of an object in its path. The 
object receives that portion of the force which lies within 
its own vectorial cone, while empty spaces receive the great 
preponderating remainer. What does empty space do with 
this remainder? Many other equally pertinent questions 
might be asked, but space does not permit. 

97. The Universality of the Inverse First Power Variation. 
Distance as an obstacle to the transmission of force, is 
another implication in the Newtonian assumption. To the 
writer's mind it seems more rational to assume that distance 
is merely a spatial symbol by which we are informed in 
regard to the relative magnitude of their combined activity 
in conjunction with all other active influences. In other 
words, distance is not an obstacle to action, but a sense 
measure of the inner relation of things existing in an inter- 
acting unitary system. Consequently we maintain that no 
reason can be found why this inner relation or affinity must 
be expressed as an inverse function of the second power of 
the distance. If we admit — as we must — that distance is a 
perceptual means of depicting the intensity of phenomenal 
relations, it does not follow that the square of the distance 
is a relative measure of the mutual effect. It is far more 
rational to suppose that the perceptual symbol is strictly 
proportionate to the relative effects made known through it ; 
and consequently distance itself, expressed in its inverse 
first power, must be the ultimate measure of physical activ- 
ity relationships. It may be asserted that this is mere spec- 
ulation and that facts prove the inverse square hypothesis. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 155 

We maintain that the testimony of mechanics, the testimony 
of thermodynamics, and the testimony of electrochemistry 
bear out the contention for the inverse first power hypothe- 
sis. The subsequent portions of this discussion will be de- 
voted to the proof of this assertion. 

98. The Meagre Evidence Serving as the Basis of the New- 
tonian Relation. 
It is maintained that physical astronomy is impossible 
without recourse to the Newtonian formula. Furthermore, 
it is contended that this formula is an absolute essential to 
the science of physics. May we inquire, what are these 
facts that constitute the living witnesses which testify to 
the validity of the Newtonian formula? In reply you will 
refer to the Newtonian inference that a central force vary- 
ing inversely as the square of the distance to the earth and 
directly as the product of the sun's and earth's masses con- 
stitutes a complete causal explanation of Kepler's three 
laws. The amount of the moon's deflection toward the earth 
will be cited as another verification of the Newtonian tenet 
for the reason that the amount of this deflection can be cal- 
culated by the Newtonian formula. The phenomena of the 
tides will be mentioned as substantial evidence. The experi- 
ments of Cavendish, Cornu, Wilsing, Boys, and others, upon 
the deflection of masses under the gravitational influence 
will be used as further corroborative proofs. The fact 
remains, however, that all these experiments, because of 
their lack of precision, merely prove that a type of influ- 
ence or interaction between bodies exists to which science 
has applied the name gravitation. Even hasty reflection will 
convince everyone of the difficulty of securing accurate data 
concerning the phenomena of the tides. The same is true of 
the other cases cited. Therefore such cases do not suflice 
to establish the correctness of a formula. Where precision 
is possible, the mass-product relation of Newton cannot be 
established. In such cases mass interactions are propor- 
tionate to the additive mass values and not to their products. 
Moreover, the spans between equilibrated masses are related 
in accordance with the inverse linear function of the first 
and not the second degree. 



156 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

99. The Planetary Orbits According to the Space-Time Po- 
tential. 

The errors in the Newtonian assumption have been 
clearly pointed out in the preceding. If results are obtained, 
in conformity with fact, from erroneous premises, then it 
follows that the modus operandi of obtaining these results 
must also be in error. In other words, two compensating 
errors have been introduced into the procedure. This bears 
out our contention that the Newtonian formula itself is in 
error. 

The writer has developed the Keplerian relations from 
premises which are in complete accord with the principle 
of universal interaction hereinbefore set forth. Newton 
himself maintained the universality of gravitational inter- 
action, but abandoned it in his test application to the orbital 
motions of the planets. In this way an apparent substanti- 
ation of his erroneous formula was secured. For the sake 
of the general reader we content ourselves here with a 
statement of the premises and the significance of the con- 
clusions derived by the mathematical analysis. 

Our development of the orbital equation is based pri- 
marily upon the fact that space is a sense chart of position 
values in such a manner that the location of a thing in 
space is determined by the directional intensity of the inter- 
action at the particular position. For purposes of analysis 
we confine ourselves to a limited portion of this space. We 
further confine ourselves to any convenient plane A in space 
whose extension we limit by four lines. The plane A, thus 
bounded, is assumed to be subjected to interaction activity 
intensities in accordance with our fundamental principle. 
In a mathematical analysis it is convenient to consider defi- 
nite components of the activity intensities. The writer has 
developed the following expression for the path of a body 
free to move in a plane A subjected to the before-mentioned 
activity conditions ; 

3 3 

f: + f; - '• 

In this expression x and y are the coordinates of any point 
in the orbital curve, and F^ and F,, are the resultant 
activity intensities. This expression is the equation of a 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 157 

conic section. In the form given it represents an ellipse. 
This equation differs in a marked manner from the New- 
tonian expression in that it contains a genuine physical 
basis for the types of the orbits. The truth of this asser- 
tion is apparent from an investigation of the expression 
itself, v^hich shows that the type of the orbit depends upon 
the relative magnitude of the activity factors Fx and Fy 
If these factors are equal to each other, the conic becomes 
a circle. If they are unequal in magnitude, the curve is 
an ellipse which tends toward a parabola when the ratio 
of their intensities approaches an infinite value. Con- 
versely, if the orbit is an ellipse, the activity factors pre- 
vailing in the plane of the orbit are unequal in magnitude. 
For negative values of ' Fy" the curve becomes an hyper- 
bola. 

An exhaustive investigation of a material system inter- 
acting according to the tenets of the Space-Time Potential 
involves a reference to a three-directional system of coordi- 
nate axes. The space of sense is most conveniently regarded 
as a triply extended manifold. The Newtonian relation is 
derived from a one-directional vectorial system which re- 
gards the sun as a central force. The one-directional 
attraction between the sun and the earth is, according to 
Nev^on, a complete and sufficient reason for the earth's 
orbit type. We cannot agree with this convenient simpli- 
fication for the reason that any finite portion of a plane A 
in space must be under the influence of a two-directional 
activity system. In this manner only are we able to include 
all the activity factors within the plane beyond the confines 
of the finite portion considered. By referring the finite por- 
tion of the plane, as the writer has done in his development, 
to an X and Y axis, all activity factors in the plane will be 
either above or below the X axis, and to the left or the right 
of the Y axis. In this manner only can we conform with 
the requirement that the interaction be universal. New- 
ton's development fails utterly in conforming with this re- 
quirement, which is the most important part of his own 
enunciation. 

The writer has developed the Keplerian relations by using 
the well-known facts of dynamics without resorting to the 
erroneous Nev^onian central mass attraction idea and the 



158 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

inverse square hypothesis. In these developments the 
author has adhered to the basic principle that the body 
which is free to move in the plane A is actuated by the 
activity factors F^ and Fy, 

These developments, in addition to their intrinsic inter- 
est, serve to demonstrate the fact that our basic thesis of 
interaction is capable of constructive application resulting 
in relations which conform with observed facts. In this 
manner we remove the possibility of substantiating the 
charge that our work is destructive and not construct- 
ive. — See Appendix A. 

100. The Obliquity of the Ecliptic Points to a Third Direc- 

tional Activity Factor. 

The inclination of the earth's axis to the plane of its orbit 
shows conclusively that a third activity factor influences the 
system. Since the obliquity of the ecliptic — that is, the 
angle between the plane of the ecliptic and the earth's equa- 
torial plane — is about 23" 27' 8", the angle which the earth's 
axis makes with the ecliptic is about 66° 32' 52". This angle 
is practically constant during the earth's elliptical motion 
in the plane of the ecliptic. Since the earth's semi-diameter 
(according to Bessel) is 20,923,597 feet, the distance h 
along a normal to the plane of the ecliptic from the most 
remote point of the earth's equatorial circumference is 
8,327,260 feet. During one complete revolution of the earth 
about its axis this point traverses through a total normal 
distance=:4/i in the time 23 hours, 56 minutes, and 4 sec- 
onds=:86,164 seconds. For the distance h the time is 21,541 
seconds. This corresponds to an acceleration a=0.035892 
feet per second per second along the normal to the ecliptic, 

2 h 

since a=^ — . It is therefore clear that the obliquity of the 

ecliptic cannot be maintained without the continuous activ- 
ity of a third directional activity factor. 

101. Note on the Discrepancy Between the Newtonian Rela- 
tion and Dynamics. 

The Newtonian relation states that gravitational attrac- 
tion varies directly with the product of the masses ??i and 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 159 

M, and inversely with the square of the distance s between 
them; that is, G (the gravitational attraction) varies with 

mM 

If we employ the fundamental and experimentally de- 
monstrable laws of motion, force, and work which form the 
very foundation of dynamics, then a radically different 
expression results which involves the sum of the masses 
and the distance to the inverse first power. The truth of 
the laws of dynamics has been established by an overwhelm- 
ing array of experimental facts. For this and other reasons 
already stated the physico-mathematical developments of 
the Space-Time Potential are Non-Newtonian. See Ap- 
pendix B. 



CHAPTER VII 

Some Applications of the Space-Time Potential. 

102. The Basic Functions of the Space-Time Potential. 

We have already shown that the laws of motion of plane- 
tary bodies may be derived from the principle of universal 
interaction in a unitary system as set forth in the Space- 
Time Potential. Without entering into the details of the 
actual mathematical analysis, we shall briefly outline some 
further applications of the system. 

We have pointed out the fact that the Newtonian inverse 
square variation hypothesis does not agree with an over- 
whelming array of easily ascertained experimental facts. 
Dynamics and mechanics, in toto, contradict the Newtonian 
tenet. Moreover, the Newtonian hypothesis fails utterly to 
account for ultra-atomic energies. Whatever the laws may 
be which pertain to the ultimate primordial particle, these 
laws also hold, without modification, for the aggregates of 
these particles. An increase or decrease in the mere number 
of these particles in no way affects their ultimate nature. 
Sense perception tells a true story of the relative intensity of 
the interaction between these particles and their aggregates. 
Therefore distance to the first power, and not to the second 
power as held by Newton, is the true measure of the relativ- 
ity of the interaction. In ultra-atomic activities the Newton- 
ian relation must be augmented by arbitrarily chosen con- 
stants in order to account for the developed intensities. 
Sense perception tells us that when two particles are in close 
proximity, the interaction is greater than when they are sep- 
arated by a greater distance. The direct testimony of sense 
perception introduces two facts: first, an inverse relation; 
and, second, an actual distance which means distance to the 
first power. Newton's principal claim for the justification of 
his inverse second power relation is based upon the alleged 
agreement with the requirements of planetary motion. The 
errors involved in this contention have been set forth. The 

160 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 161 

writer has shown that the planetary relations can be devel- 
oped, without the use of the Newtonian relation, from prem- 
ises which agree with fact and which were held by Newton 
himself only to be abandoned when he attempted a direct 
application. 

The basic tenet of the Space-Time Potential is that the 
intensity of universal interaction varies inversely with the 
first power of the distance intervening between any two 
interacting particles. By using this principle a reconcilia- 
tion, without the use of arbitrary constants, is effected be- 
tween celestial mechanics, dynamics, statics, thermodynam- 
ics, molecular physics, electricity, and ultra-atomic activi- 
ties. Our basic tenet may be stated definitely as follows: 
the intensity of interaction /^ for any variable intervening 
distance s between any two activity factors A and B varies 
inversely with the distance s between them. From this 
statement is follows that 



•-a) 



where A: is a constant which can be determined experiment- 
ally. By selecting proper units the constant k may be made 
equal to unity, and then the expression is at once recog- 
nized as the equation of the hyperbola. This relation con- 
stitutes the primary or hyperbolic function of the Space- 
Time Potential. 

By integrating this primary function we obtain an ex- 
pression for the work W done in the displacement of an 
activity factor from some initial position to a final position. 
In order to accomplish this summation or integration by 
the calculus the so-called differential of the variable must 
be introduced. In this way we obtain the following 
relation : 



/■.,.=/.(i) 



W= /ls.ds= / k(- ds = k.logeS. 



The latter expression constitutes the secondary or logarith- 
mic function of the Space-Time Potential. 

Be it noted that both of these basic functions involve 
the inverse first power of the distance. In the following 
paragraphs we shall give some of the direct applications of 
these functions. 



162 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

103. Some Typical Cases of the Primary or Hyperbolic Func- 
tions. 
Boyle's Law of Isothermal Expansion of Gases, in which 
the temperature remains constant during expansion, states 
that the product of the pressure p and the volume v is equal 
to a constant c, that is, 

pv = c and p = c( - J 

evidently comes under the primary or hyperbolic function. 
It is evident that the volume is a function of the distance s 
between the gas particles. For any two given particles the 
variation is a function of the inverse first power of the 
distance s. The resulting volume is due to this type of in- 
teractional activity in a three-dimensional manifold. 

In the field of electrochemistry we find the inverse first 
power relation governing the activities. Mass dissociation 
in an electrolytic cell due to the action of definite current 
intensities may be representd by 

where M is the liberated mass in grams, r is the current in 
ampere-hours, and h is & constant. The above expression 
may be reduced to its primitive form : 

(Ma)s = F.s = C, and F = c(^^^ 

In this latter form it is clear that electric dissociation comes 
under the primary or hyperbolic function. It is worthy of 
note that, by suitable transformations, the distance factor 
may be made to appear as a direct instead of an inverse 
variation. However, in the former case the expression will 
be indicative primarily of something other than a pure activ- 
ity intensity. 

The real significance of the charge e exhibited by an 
electron and an ion is seen from the expression — 

mr =e, a constant, 
where r' is the C. G. S. electrostatic units per unit of 
valence necessary to liberate one gram of an ion, and m is 
the mass of the ion using the gram as the unit of mass. 

From the above expression it is apparent that electrical 
relations are of the same order as the volume-pressure 



M 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 163 

relation which pertains to gases. In other words, the 
masses of the ions are related to the electrical intensities 
or charges in the same manner as the volume of a gas is 
related to the applied pressure. Herein we have the real 
meaning of the constancy of the charge e which is used so 
frequently in modern electrophysics. 

104. Essential Features of the Secondary or Logarithmic 
Function. 

According to the Space-Time Potential, interaction is 
unfolded in time upon that potential chart of work values 
which we call space. Since space and time are relativities 
of the first order, it follows that the work values themselves 
have only relative significance. The relative relations be- 
tween the work values in the most minute portion of space 
are deducible from the same fundamental function which 
serves to interpret these relations in a space of unlimited 
extent. The writer has shown that the secondary or loga- 
rithmic function may be used to construct a space chart of 
work values. When this is done we find that this function 
contains within itself the story of two worlds : the micro- 
cosm, the small world of positons, energons, electrons, and 
atoms; and the macrocosm, the great world of molecules, 
bodies, and planets. When the secondary function, 

W = F(s) = (Ma)s= /ls.ds= /k(^)ds = k.logeS, 

is plotted from some suitable point as a center, preferably 
the point which causes (log^s) to equal zero, we obtain a 
series of concentric loci which pertain to definite potential 
work values. For example, if we begin with zero and take 
any series of n numbers like the following: 0, 0.01, 0.05, 
0.10, 0.20, 0.30, 0.40, 0.50, 0.60, 0.70, 0.80, 0.90, 1.00, 
1.111/9, 1.25, 1.43, 1.67, 2.00, 2.50, 3.33, 5.00, 10.00, 20.00, 
100.00 . . . etc. . . . 7^, we find that this group of 
numbers divides itself into two systems of positive and neg' 
ative work loci about the number 1.00 as the neutral norm 
of the systems. Suppose, now, that we adopt a convenient 
distance unit (centimeter or inch) and plot these values as 
distances, beginning with zero, along the same straight line, 



164 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

then we have established a condition which is replete with 
unlimited physico-mathematical possibilities. The scope 
and intent of this work prohibit a detailed exposition of 
the writer's investigations in this field. We have previously- 
refuted materialism and we have shown that a consistent 
and true interpretative science must be based upon philos- 
ophy and religion, for the reason that the isolation of spec- 
ulative science from philosophy and metaphysics invariably 
results in a narrow view of the cosmos which therefore re- 
dounds with inconsistencies. In this constructive portion 
of our work we show that consistent scientific developments 
possessing unlimited unifying potencies follow directly from 
our broader view of reality. We are forced to confine our- 
selves to a brief statement of some of the particularly sig- 
nificant developments. 

Eeturning to the consideration of the n numbers, plotted 
as distances along the same right line from an initial origin 
or zero point, let us divide the group of numbers into two 
sub-groups formed about the point corresponding to the 
number one, to which the writer has given the name ''change 
poinf for the obvious reason that the work values change 
their signs in passing through this point. Beginning with 
the change point (1), let us designate all numbers greater 
than 1 as group G and all values of n less than 1 as group 
L, Group G then is composed of all values of n from one 
(1) to infinity ( oo ) , and group L is composed of all values 
of n from one (1) to zero (0). The author has shown that 
for all values of n in group G the work value or work con- 
stants are positive ( + ), and for all values of n in group L 
the work constants are negative ( — ). Moreover, he has 
proved that for any particular positive work constant 
(_|_W) calculated from a given value of n in group G, there 
corresponds an equal negative work constant ( — W) which 

may be calculated from the value ( - ) , that is the recip- 
rocal of n in the group L. The work done in displacement 
from the change point 1 to any point n is given by the 
relation 

W = k|log£n-logsl| = k.logc|H. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 165 

Similarly, the work of displacement from point m to 
point n is found from the expression 

W = k<log£n-logem> = k.log£< — >. 
Moreover, the work done in displacement from the 
change point 1 to any point (-] in group L is ex- 
pressed by 

W = k|logsl-log£Ql==k.logem = k.logen. 

To illustrate by specific values, we find that for a value of n= 
100, W= +4.605, and for a vaW~) = Y^ = 01 we find that 
W= -4.605. Similarly, for n = 1.25, W=+0.223, and for 
AVy^=0.80, W= -0.223. See Appendix C. 

If we let Sn be the distance from the change point 1 to 
any point n in the group or system G, and s^ the correspond- 
ing distance from the change point to the point n in the sys- 
tem L, then we readily observe that 

, ,, , (n-1) 

Sn = (n— 1), and s^=^ 

Thus, forn = 2.5, Sn=(n-l) = (2.5-1.0) = 1.5, and 

To construct the two corresponding work loci we lay off a 
distance Sn = 1.5 unit along a straight line to the right of an 
arbitrarily chosen change point, and to the left of the change 
point along the same line we lay off a distance Sj|:=0.60 unit. 

The value n = 2.5 corresponds to s„=1.5, and for f- j = 0.4, 

s^ = 0.60. The work constant TF„ (corresponding to the value 
n) = log ^n = log£2. 5 = hyperbolic logarithm of 2.5 = +0.916. 
Similarly, the work constant W^ (corresponding to the value 

-)=log£[-J = log£0.4 = hyperbolic logarithm of 0.4=— 0.916. 

The corresponding force constants are : 

^ Wn +0.916 ,^.,^2 ,^ Wi -0.916 ^ _2 

^^=-i:=-i:5-=+'-^^^3'""^^^=ir=-o:F=-i-^23- 



166 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

Work or potential loci may be plotted in any given plane 
in space concentrically about the change point as a radial 
center. Interacting mass-acceleration {M,a) aggregates 
or kerns group themselves in complete conformity with the 
force loci of their common plane. The particular spatial 
juxtaposition of the activity kerns is a direct consequence 
of the innate character of reality and not of the coercion of 
space. Similarly, the ordered flow of change is due to the 
innate intent of reality and not to a coercive influence of 
time regarded as an activity agent. In order to clarify 
the meaning of the above statements let us consider the 
two mass-acceleration kerns 

Fn = Mn. an aud F^ = M^. a*. 

The Universal Law of Interaction exemplified in our 
secondary or logarithmic function is substantiated by all 
known experimental facts. This law demands that during 
interaction the two kerns Fn and F^ be continuously 
located in the same straight line, on opposite sides of their 
common change point, and in loci whose work or potential 
constants are equal in magnitude but opposite in sign. If 
the two kerns be in rotation they will continue to rotate 
along loci of equal potential about the change point as a 
common center unless this form of activity be modified by 
the advent of extraneous influences. We give the name 
"normal line" to that straight line which passes through 
the change point and upon which the two kerns are 
located. If the kern Fn is displaced away from the change 
point along the normal line to a locus of higher potential, 
then the kern F^ is simultaneously displaced in the opposite 
direction, to a locus of the same potential but opposite in 
sign. During displacement along the normal line both kerns 
undergo a change in magnitude which conforms with the 
constants of the traversed loci. Herein, then, we find a 
valid physical reason for the Kaufmann effect. When a 
system is in rotation in accordance with the mandates of 
the universal law of interaction, we say that it is in a con- 
dition of dynamic equilibrium, in contradistinction to the 
well known terrestrial condition of static equilibrium. If 
the kerns be great aggregates, as in the case of the sun and 
the earth, then the change point may be found within the 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 167 

confines of the neater kem. The resulting orbits are loci 
of equal potential. The type of the orbit is a resultant of 
the complexity of the interaction. It should now be clear 
that distance is not a barrier to action, but a measure of 
its relativity. We may now readily picture the relations 
between the two kerns Fn and F^, For a value of n = 2.5 
we must locate F„ — M„ a„ = 0.610 2/3 along the normal 
line at a distance Sn = 1.5 unit. In the oposite direction 
and at a distance s^ = 0.60 unit we must locate the other 
kern F^ = M* a^ = 1.52 2/3. If the system be in rota- 
tion and uninfluenced by extraneous factors (a purely theo- 
retical case), then the kerns will rotate about the change 
point in concentric circular orbits whose radii are desig- 
nated by the values of s„ and s^ respectively. 

The product of the kern magnitude Fn by its distance Sn 
is equal to the product of F^ by s^. This relation is of the 
same type as that well-known relation in statistic which 
pertains to the lever. A notable difference is the fact that 
the accelerations are different in magnitude. This is evi- 
dent if we write the above statement in terms of mass and 
acceleration as follows : 

(Mn.an)sn= (MA.ai)si. 
The writer has shown that the ratio between the two ac- 
celerations an and a^ is equal to the value n for all values 
of n greater than 1.11 i, and consequently for all values of 



© 



less than 0.90. If we make the two accelerations in the 



above expression equal, we can at once deduce the law of 
the lever, which is the most important principle in mechan- 
ics and statics. 

1 an 
Since n in the above is greater than 1.11«, -^=»n and 

Vf a^i 

ai = — • The following is self-evident: 

(Mn.an)sn«n<Mn(^j>Sn = n{Mn.ai)sn={Mi.ai} Si, and 

therefore it follows that 

(Mn)n.Sn=(Mi)si. 

This expression is of the same order as the well-known law 
of the lever. That it is correct in value as well as form may 



168 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

be shown by reducing it to an identity by substituting the 
following values : 

Mi-n2(Mn), and ^-2=n, 

Si 

which the writer has shown to be true for all values of n 
greater than 1.11 f. 

In the terrestrial gravitation constant of acceleration g, 
we find a common case of equalized acceleration which modi- 
fies the general expression, as shown above, into the form 
expressed by the law of the lever. For the case of the lever 
the change point becomes the fulcrum in reference to which 
the arm of M^ is s^ and the arm of Mn is nsn* The fol- 
lowing is noteworthy : 

Mi_n^_ ^ 
Mn" Si -'' • 
By this relation in the well-known law of the lever is linked 
to the '*genital number" n of the Space-Time Potential. 

A simple numerical example will serve to illustrate the 
relation between dynamic and static equilibrium outlined 
above. 

Let the genital number n = 2.5, as above. For this value 
of n the work constants are -{- Wn = -{- 0.916 and — W^ 
= — 0.916. The corresponding force constants are 
Fn = + 0.610% and F# = — 1.52%. 

Case I. Dynamic Equilibrium 
The mass M» = unity is located on the work locus + Wn 
at a distance s^ = 1.5 unit from the change point. 

The mass M^ = n^ (Mn) = (2.5) ^ (1.0) = 6.25 units is 
located on the work locus — W^ at a distance s^ — 0.60 
unit from, but on the other side of, the change point, all 
three points being on the normal line. The following re- 
lation holds : 

Ftr. s« = F*. Sit and + 0.610% (1.5) = 1.52% (—0.6) 
r^Wt. = 0.916. 

Case II. Static Equilibrium 
This is the case of the ordinary lever. 

The mass M„ = unity is located at a distance n{Sn) = 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 169 

2.5 (1.5) = 3.75 units from the change point, which now 
constitutes the fulcrum of the lever. The Mass M^ = 6.25 
units, as previously, remains located as in Case I. Then we 
have the following : 

(Mn)n.Sn= (M\\ si 

^ n / n 

and (1.0) (2.5) (1.5) = (6.25) (0.60) = 3.75. 

It is evident that for M„ — unity the constant for this 
system is n (s^). 

Although the scope of the main portion of this work pro- 
hibits a mathematical treatment, nevertheless it would be 
unfortunate to omit the simple relations which unfold them- 
selves as a consequence of the philosophical contemplation of 
the physical universe. 

105. Macrocosmic Relations. 
Let 

n = the genital number, 

W„ = the work done from the change point 1 to the 
point n, 

W^ = the work done from the change point 1 to 
the point (^) (this work is the same, irrespec- 
tive of direction) , 

tn = time of translation through distance s„, 

ti = time of translation through distance s^, 

then, for values of n greater than 1.11 1 and for d) less 
than 0.90, the following relations, derived from the second- 
ary or logarithmic function, hold good : 

Wtr = Wi — the hyperbolic logarithm of the genital 
number n; 

. t„ = ti; s. = (n--l); sa ^(l-i) = ^^^^ 

Sg^Vn^an^ Mjr.aj t^^ M-^^^2. 
s* VA ai, M^ 'm; ' 

Wn=(M..aJsn = Wi = (Mi.aA)si;F, = ^; Fa = ^. 

These relations pertain to celestial mechanics and mole- 
cular physics. In conjunction with the ordinary laws of 
motion, and by suitable modifications to conform with ter- 



170 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

restrial conditions, these relations constitute the funda- 
mentals of macrocosmic mechanics. The resulting values 
receive their proper interpretation through the selection 
of suitable units. 

106. — Microcosmic Relations 

By means of the secondary or logarithmic function we 
may pass with precision from the macrocosm to the micro- 
cosm without resorting to constants, arbitrarily chosen, in 
order to reconcile the glaring discrepancies which arise in 
the old physics. For values of n less than 1.111% and of 
(i) greater than 0.90, the following relations, derived 
directly from the secondary or logarithmic functions, 
obtain : 
Wn=Wi; tn=ti;Sn=Si;yn=Vi;an=ai; Ma=Mi; Ma.aa=Mi.ai. 

nnnnn a on 

Our secondary function takes us, without apology, into 
the world of atoms, positons, energons, and electrons. It 
is noteworthy that the orbital radii in the microcosm are 
equal for a given system derived from a particular genital 
number. We have seen that in the macrocosm they are 
unequal and that their ratio is expressed by n, the genital 
number. 

107. Applications of These Relations. 

Using the expression pertaining to motion in conjunction 
with the relations previously set forth, the writer has cal- 
culated the charge e exhibited by an electron. In these cal- 
culations the mass of the electron was assumed to be that 
which corresponds to a velocity t; = 3.0 X 10® centimeters 
per second = xV of the velocity of the light in air. For 
this velocity the mass of the electron is practically constant. 
The writer's calculated value of e = 4.77 X 10-^° C. G. S. 
electrostatic unit corresponds closely with the experimental 
values derived by H. A. Wilson (e = 3.1 X 10-^°.), J. J. 
Thomson (e — 3.4 + 10-^^) and R. A. Millikan (4.77 X 
10—^°) . See Appendices B and D. 

An important fact was disclosed by these calculations. 
It became evident that the masses of ions and electrons are 
related to the electrical intensities in the same way that the 
volume of a gas is related to the applied pressure. This fact 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 171 

constitutes another confirmation of the fundamental tenets 
of the Space-Time Potential. 

The writer has employed the above fundamental rela- 
tions in the calculation of the physical dimension of mole- 
cules. The method is free from the mathematical com- 
plexity of the prevalent methods. The writer's method con- 
sists briefly in the determination of the genital number n 
which corresponds to the decomposition voltage for any 
particular molecule. Thus in the case of the hydrochloric 
acid molecule, whose normal solution has a decomposition 
voltage of 1.31 volts = 0.0043666 C. G. S. electrostatic unit 
of potential difference, we find that the work constants equal 
1.99322 X 10-^^ The distance s„ from the change point to 
the center of the hydrogen atom is found to be 2.47730 X 
10—* cm. Similarly, the distance s^ from the change point 
to the center of the chlorine atom is found to be 0.41755 X 
10—® cm. The distance center to center of the hydrogen and 
chlorine atoms is, then, the sum of these values; that is, 
2.89485 X 10—® centimeters. This result is in complete con- 
formity with results derived by totally different and far less 
direct methods of investigation. 

108. Theory of Relativity. 

Were we asked to choose the most stupendous of the un- 
limited number of marvels and mysteries extant in the phy- 
sical universe, we feel certain that no error would be com- 
mitted if we selected the phenomenon of light. How a per- 
son of sound mind can remain a materialist after contem- 
plating the infinite profundities involved in the phenomenon 
of light is beyond comprehension. That the world is far 
more than matter and chance should be evident to any per- 
son free from bias, after nothing more than a hasty survey 
of this most marvelous phenomenon. Not least of its many 
marvels is the extraordinary fact that the velocity of light 
(3 X 10^** centimeters per second) is a constant, irrespec- 
tive of the velocity of the observer. If an observer travelled 
in an aeroplane, in the direction of the propagation of light, 
at the velocity of 100 miles per hour, then if it were possible 
to increase this velocity to 100,000 miles per hour the ob- 
served velocity of propagation of light would still remain 
the same. The broad interpretation of the experiments of 



172 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

Michelson and others leads to this astounding conclusion. 
This fact forms the basic nucleus of the modern theory of 
relativity. H. A. Lorentz has attempted, with exceptional 
ingenuity, to derive a physical basis for the theory of 
relativity. Lorentz believes that an independent ether inter- 
acting in a compressional manner with electronic matter 
provides the desired physical basis for the principle of 
relativity. Poincare has done much to further this view. 
We are at one with these investigators in their contention 
that the root of relativity is found in interaction, but we 
differ with them in their conclusion that the interaction 
factors are radically different in their ultimate nature. We 
find our physical justification for the principle of relativity 
in the interaction between the concurrent and excitant 
masses in accordance with the relations inherent in our 
primary and secondary functions. According to our view, 
the excitant mass (of sub-atomic magnitude), during its 
translatory progress through the concurrent system, com- 
posed of gyratory groups of energons, interacts therewith in 
a manner productive of those vibratory oscillations known 
generally as waves of light. Electric oscillations are of the 
same general order and are produced in a similar manner. 
For the phenomena of light and genital number n = v, the 
velocity of light (3 x ^^^^ centimeters per second). 
Letting the subscript n refer to the excitant system and the 
subscript (^) to the concurrent system and using the 
macrocosmic relations (paragraph 105), we have the fol- 
lowing expressions on the basis of a unit of time : 

s^ = Vn= (n— 1) == (V— 1), for the excitant system, and 

s^L = VA = ^^ - = - — y—, for the concurrent system. 

From this it follows that: 

^ = V; K+va) ==(s,+Si)=:^^^?^^= practically V. 

This means that the ratio of the velocity t'„ of the excitant 
system to the velocity v^ of the concurrent system is always 
equal to the constant velocity V of light. Moreover, the 
total energized space, for a period of interaction equal to 
one second, is practically equal to the same constant V. The 
constancy of the velocity of light arises out of the relative 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 173 

velocities of the excitant and the concurrent systems. In 
this fact we have a genuine physical basis for the principle 
of relativity. The present extent of our knowlege of physi- 
cal facts indicates that the maximum value of the genital 
number n which obtains in the physical universe is 
n=V = SX 10'^. That the velocity Vn of the electronic ex- 
citant system can never equal the value V is evident from 
the expression Vn = (n — 1) = (V — 1) . The velocity v^ 
of the concurrent system differs inappreciably from one 
centimeter per second or a little less than two feet per 
minute. The effect of so slight a translatory motion is 
negligible as far as terrestrial conditions are concerned. 
The distance K traversed by light in one second is the cos- 
mic unit of distance. The writer has given the name "Kos- 
mometer" to the distance K = S X 10^^ centimeters. The 
Kaufmann effect finds its interpretation in the secondary 
function by making the unit distance from the change point 
to the origin of coordinates equal to s^ = i/^iiT. Velocities v 
plotted from the change point along the horizontal or X axis 
will then appear as fractions of the velocity V for the time 
unit one second. The work constant for any velocity v is 
then the vertical ordinate corresponding to the value 
(v ^ V) measured from the change point. By applying the 
fundamental relations of the secondary function to this 
system the writer has developed the following expression 
for the force (mass-acceleration) kern (F^), 



{^1 



That the variation of the velocity v has practically no effect 
upon the value of F^ up to a value of v = 0.01 V is brought 
out by applying the above expression to values of v ranging 
from zero to 0.01 V. On a unit basis the total increase in 
F^ over this wide range is only 0.005. If we take the value 
of F^, which corresponds to v =z 0.01 V, as a base, then the 
ratios of F^ to this base, for values of v increasing from 
V = 0.01 y to f = y, are in conformity with the experimen- 
tal results established by Kaufmann. In fact, the average 
conformity is greater than the average agreement arising 



174 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

fiom the use of the following expression by Lorentz and 
Einstein : 

B_= 1 



^/{-(-v)} 



For Lorentz this expression indicates a contraction of 
the electrons during translatory motion due to the pressure 
of the ether. Referring to this theory of Lorentz, H. Poin- 
care states in his work "Science and Hypothesis" : "It is in 
contradiction to Newton's law that action and reaction are 
equal and opposite — or, rather, this principle, according to 
Lorentz, cannot be applicable to matter alone ; if it be true, 
it must take into account the action of the ether on matter, 
and the reaction of the matter on the ether." * 

The writer's expression, derived from the basic relations 
of the Space-Time Potential, affords a complete justification 
in the generalized conception of action and reaction involved 
in the principle of interaction between two material sys- 
tems, the excitant and the concurrent systems ; that is, be- 
tween secondary and primary matter. Our expression con- 
forms with the requirements of the Kaufmann effect, which 
shows that for a velocity increase beyond a certain crucial 
velocity the kern magnitude increases toward an infinite 
limit as the velocity of light V is approached. The inability 
of the electron to reach an infinite magnitude indicates that 
this kern can never acquire the velocity of light. The above 
facts involve the complete relativity of energy, force, mass, 
space, and time. See Appendix E. 

109. The Structure of the Atom. 

J. J. Thomson battled bravely and with profound mathe- 
matical sagacity to produce a stable mechanistic atom from 
an electronic protostructure. Thomson's atom consists of a 
positively charged (whatever that is) outer sphere having 
electrons disposed uniformly upon one or more inner con- 
centric spheres. Rutherford, finding the Thomsonian atom 
incapable of explaining the numerous phenomena of radio- 



' Science and Hypothesis, p. 175. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 175 

activity, adopted the Saturnian type of atom suggested by 
Nagaoka in 1904. Nagaoka's atom is practically the Thom- 
sonian atom turned, as it were, inside out. A large positive 
nucleus is placed arbitrarily at the center, while the elec- 
trons are arranged upon a series of concentric exterior 
shells. Both types of atoms are expressions of a desire 
mechanistically to combine and unify the two phases, the 
positive and the negative, inherent in all phenomenal ac- 
tivity, without a sufficient ground in the nature of reality 
for the manner of their unification. In the very nature of 
things, these two phases have never been separated, there- 
fore their unification is unnecessary. The Space-Time Po- 
tential shows us the nature of their eternal union, and we 
are not called upon to combine, in an arbitrary way, that 
which is already unified in a definite, unchanging manner. 
According to the Space-Time Potential, an atom is composed 
of neutral energons, capable of positive and negative inter- 
action in conformity with the dictates of prevailing condi- 
tions, and arranged along concentric work loci whose com- 
mon center constitutes the change point of the system. 
Every work locus has its positive and its negative phase. 
A positive work factor, with its inseparable yet equal nega- 
tive antipodal, constitutes a unitary activity factor capable 
of two-directional activity (positive and negative) proceed- 
ing from a primary neutral condition. Matter is therefore 
capable of exhibiting three phases of activity — the neutral 
or primary phase and the positive and negative phases, 
known herein as secondary matter. 

The molecule of the Space-Time Potential consists of 
atomic groups arranged along the work loci about a result- 
ant change point in conformity with the requirements of 
the secondary function. In molecular systems we have seen 
that the radial magnitude, measured from the resultant 
change point to the atomic centers located upon work loci 
of equal potentials, are unequal. 

110. Metageometry and Space. 

The first hints of a metageometry or non-Euclidean 
geometry are found in the work of Nasir Eddin (1201- 
1274). Girolamo Saccheri (1667-1733), a learned Jesuit, 
studied the problem of parallels from a new viewpoint. 



176 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

Another point of attack was secured by Johann Heinrich 
Lambert (1728-1777). The interest taken in this subject 
is evident when we mention the following renowned con- 
tributors to its theories: Gauss, Riemann, Lobatchevsky, 
Janos Bolyai, Helmholtz, Grassmann, Cayley, Felix Klein, 
Simon Newcomb, Paul Stackel, Friedrich Engel, G. B. Hal- 
sted, H. Poincare, B. J. Delbceuf, Ernst Mach, Bertrand A. 
W. Russell, Beltrami, and Sophus Lie. 

Pangeometry or metageometry is essentially non-Eu- 
clidean. These speculations grew out of the consideration 
of that axiom of Euclid which states that but one straight 
line can be drawn through a given point parallel to a given 
straight line. According to Euclidean geometry, two 
straight lines are parallel when they lie in the same plane 
and cannot meet or approach each other, however far they 
may be produced. Moreover, since parallel lines cannot 
approach each other, they are everywhere equally distant 
from each other. Lobatchevsky and Bolyai claim that it 
is impossible to prove that only one straight line can be 
drawn through a given point parallel to a given straight 
line. Because of this alleged inability to prove this Euclid- 
ean axiom, Lobatchevsky assumed that several parallels may 
be drawn through a given point to any given straight line. 
Both Lobatchevsky and Bolyai believed that this assump- 
tion constituted a generalization which made of Euclidean 
geometry a particular and limited branch of an all-inclusive 
pangeometry. For Lobatchevsky the sum of the angles of a 
triangle is always less than 180°, and the difference between 
their sum and 180° is proportional to the area of the tri- 
angle. Furthermore, Lobatchevsky holds that a figure simi- 
lar to a given figure but of different dimensions cannot be 
constructed. Pangeometry includes the following three 
distinct positions : 

I. Euclid, 

1. Only one straight line can be drawn through a given 
point parallel to a given straight line. 

2. The sum of the three angles of any triangle is equal 
to 180°. 

3. Space regarded as infinite. The perspective view of 
infinitely distant parts of a plane is a straight line. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 177 

II. Lohatchevsky. 

1. From a given point outside of a given straight line 
two classes of lines may be drawn — cutting and not cutting. 
The not cutting lines constitute the parallel lines for Lohat- 
chevsky, and of these there can be an infinite number. 

2. The sum of the three angles of any triangle is less 
than 180° by an amount which is proportional to the area 
of the given triangle. 

3. Space regarded as both immeasurable and limited. The 
perspective view of infinitely distant parts of a plane is a 
circle. 

4. The straight line is the limit of curvature for a 
sphere of infinite radius and zero curvature. 

5. Lobatchevsky^s geometry deals with surfaces of con- 
stant negative curvature. These are the pseudo-spherical 
surfaces. 

III. Riemann. 

1. No line can be drawn through a given parallel to a 
given line in the space of Riemann. 

2. The sum of the three angles of any triangle exceeds 
180° by an amount which is proportional to the area of the 
given triangle. 

3. The space of Riemann is unbounded but finite. 

4. Riemann's geometry deals with surfaces of constant 
positive curvature. The infinitesimal dwellers in the spheri- 
cal surface of Riemann may move forward forever, and yet 
their world is finite. Such beings by looking forward can 
see their own backs. 

The extension of these and similar mathematical specu- 
lations has led to the notion of a space-family consisting 
of an endless variety of spaces. Tridimensional space is 
merely one type. The pangeometers insist that we must 
broaden our notion of space to include such types as space 
of four, five, and n dimensions. These flights of fancy 
should permit the existence of an appropriate order of be- 
ings corresponding to the various types of space. A four- 
dimensional being, according to this view, is as far superior 
to a three-dimensional creature as the three-dimensional 
being surpasses the two-dimensional animal. A two-dimen- 
sional being cannot remove itself from the surface which 



178 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

constitutes its world of possible motion. The three-dimen- 
sional being can move along three distinct directions. Con- 
sequently, the three-dimensional being can easily remove the 
two-dimensional being from its surface world without cross- 
ing a single line within this surface. Similarly, the four- 
dimensional being can remove a three-dimensional being 
from the interior of a closed box without breaking through 
any of the enclosing walls. Whatever assurance we have 
that we shall not be suddenly removed from this sordid 
world of three dimensions without leaving the slightest 
trace must be grounded in an absolute faith that the four- 
dimensional beings are entirely free from thievish ten- 
dencies. 

A cursory inspection of the speculations of the non-Eu- 
clideans shows startling quirks and curious quips in the 
mental processes of the modern mathematicians. There can 
be no real objection to Lobatchevsky's division of lines into 
two classes — ^the cutting and the non-cutting— provided that 
he refrains from making the word "parallel" synonymous 
with "not cutting."! If we hold — as we must — ^that a 
straight line can be extended indefinitely without limit in 
its own direction, then only one "not cutting" line can be 
drawn through a given point outside of a given line. This 
one "not cutting" line will then constitute the parallel line 
of Euclidean geometry. If we arbitrarily limit the lengths 
of straight lines, then we can draw a number of "not cut- 
ting" lines, but how shall we determine the magnitude of 
the imposed limit? If we retain the definition of parallel 
lines which states that straight lines are parallel when they 
lie in the same plane and cannot meet nor approach each 
other, however far they may be produced, then it is folly to 
speak of an infinite number of parallel "not cutting" lines. 
Lobatchevsky entangles himself in a species of Kantian 
antimony in his speculations concerning the finite and the 
infinite. By placing unwarranted restrictions upon our 
a priori space construction he builds up a mathematical 
system of space relations which are mentally and logically 
consistent within the imposed unwarranted restrictions. 
This criticism holds, with equal force, for the system of 
Riemann and all the other pangeometers. All the meta- 
geometers fail to realize that space is both a priori and a 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 179 

posteriori, that it has both subjective and objective signifi- 
cance. Were this not true, any person could construct for 
himself ideal spaces whose number would be limited only 
by the fertility of his imagination. We must draw a sharp 
distinction between real space and mathematical space. 
Speculations concerning mathematical spaces may be both 
amusing and profitable to the mathematician, but these men- 
tal products must be clearly differentiated and labeled as 
"speculative products" and not realities. Real objective 
space is tridimensional and all the speculative a priori spaces 
of the pangeometers are nothing more than mental by- 
products of objective space. It is impossible crudely to 
represent or interpret these a priori spaces without resort- 
ing to the relations which pertain to real space. It may be 
interesting to speculate concerning the antics of a two- 
dimensional being of zero thickness in a spherical surface, 
but common sense prohibits us from assigning genuine phy- 
sical reality to such thought creations. We may be men- 
tally pleased with the strict code of honor observed by the 
imaginary beings which inhabit an imaginary four-dimen- 
sional space, but to attribute reality to these creatures of 
imagination is folly. Every theorem of pangeometry can 
be restated in terms of Euclidean geometry. From ordinary 
Euclidean geometry we know that the sum of the angles of 
a spherical triangle is greater than two and less than six 
right angles. Riemann's geometry, therefore, is little more 
than a new version of spherical Euclidean geometry. It has 
been claimed for pangeometry that it is a broader concept 
than the Euclidean. There is little justice in this conten- 
tion. Every form of pangeometry arises out of a limita- 
tion placed upon the concepts of Euclidean geometry. We 
cannot hope to broaden the "a priority" of our space notions 
by mental effort. The subjective spatial endowment of a 
normal human being stands in a constant relation to the 
objective world. Tridimensional space arises invariably as 
the result of interaction between the subjective and the 
objective world. No amount of mental effort will "broaden" 
this into a four-dimensional interactional resultant. There- 
fore we insist that every type of pangeometry is a particu- 
larization and limitation of tridimensional or Euclidean 
geometry. Moreover, our subjective endowment guaran- 



180 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

tees the "a priority" of geometry and mathematics. It fol- 
lows that the reality of speculative or mathematical spaces 
can be determined only through the experience of interac- 
tion with the objective world. Mathematical spaces which 
do not conform with this requirement of experience must 
be regarded merely as products of mathematical imagina- 
tion. Real space guarantees the possibility of actual motion 
in every conceivable direction. Mathematical space is a 
mental product which involves laws of imaginary motion. 
When mathematical space is tridimensional, then the laws 
of imaginary motion agree with those of real motion. 
Bodies in space are limited and finite in magnitude. Things 
are related. Space is one type of relation existing between 
things. Relations admit of continuity, while things are dis- 
crete. Herein we find the norm of the significance of the 
infinite and the finite. Space being a relation, it permits of 
an infinite progression. Therefore we are correct in postu- 
lating infinity of space. Geometry is not an experimental 
science. There is no absolute straight line in nature. The 
nearest approach to a straight line in nature is the apparent 
boundary line between sky and sea, and we know that this 
boundary is not a straight line. Geometry is an a priori 
science arising out of our subjective endowment. No 
astronomical triangle will prove or disprove the a priori 
truth that the sum of the angles of any plane triangle is 
equal to two right angles. From the above brief discussion 
it is evident that the pangeometers have fallen into the same 
error that is so common with the modern physicist ; that is, 
attributing reality to mere mathematical speculation. The 
facts of experience constitute the only true touchstone of 
reality. Using this criterion on the work of the pange- 
ometers, we find it of speculative interest and value as a 
study in mathematical manipulation. As a contribution to 
our knowledge of space, the work of the non-Euclideans is 
of little, if any, value, for the reason that we cannot even 
think except in tridimensional terms. 

111. Poincare on Central Forces. 

After this work was completed the writer ran across the 
splendid work of H. Poincare entitled "Science and Hypothe- 
sis." In paragraph 108 we have already referred to this 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 181 

work. The present chapter was written in order to make 
this work available to a larger circle of readers by elimina- 
ting the original mathematical analysis. Hence we had an 
opportunity to make particular mention of this work of 
Poincare. It affords the writer exceptional pleasure to 
quote the following from the above-mentioned work of 
Poincare : 

"But have we any right to admit the hypothesis of cen- 
tral forces? Is this hypothesis rigorously accurate? Is it 
certain that it will never be falsified by experiment? Who 
will venture to make such an assertion? And if we must 
abandon this hypothesis, the building which has been so 
laboriously erected must fall to the ground. . . . But 
no system exists which is abstracted from all external ac- 
tion ; every part of the universe is subject, more or less, to 
the action of the other parts." ' 

These statements are in complete conformity with the 
contentions made in the preceding chapters by the writer. 



Science and Hypothesis, pp. 102, 103. 



CHAPTER VIII 
Electrolytic Ionization and Cell Action 

112. Ionization Hypothesis. 

The electrolytic theory of dissociation maintains that 
molecular system passing into solution are separated into 
two kinds of ions having equal positive and negative charges. 
G. F. Fitzgerald says : "The supposed advantage of the free 
ion theory is not only illusory but misleading." H. E. 
Armstrong, J. W. Mellor, and others raise the following 
pertinent objections to the ionic hypothesis : 

1. "In view of the great chemical activity of metallic 
sodium in contact with water, is it profitable to postulate 
the existence of the element sodium in contact with water 
wihout chemical action?" 

Certainly a charged ion should show, even in solution, 
at least the same intensity of action as a neutral atom. 
Moreover, the free ion hypothesis does not give even a clue 
to the process by which a neutral atom becomes a charged 
ion in passing into solution. 

2. "Bodies carrying electrical charges of opposite sign 
are attracted and cling to one another; if, therefore, a 
mobile solution contains free and independent ions carry- 
ing enormous electrical charges of opposite sign, how can 
the charged ions remain more than momentarily free?" 

3. "If an ionized salt, say sodium chloride, is present 
in solution as a mixture of Na (+) and CI ( — ) ions, it 
might be thought possible to separate the two components 
by diffusion or by other mechanical process." 

4. "When a compound is formed from its elements, 
with the loss of energy, the compound cannot be resolved 
into its elements unless energy be supplied. It is therefore 
pertinent to inquire : What is the source of energy which 
leads to the fission of the molecule into ions carrying equal 
but opposite charges of electricity?" 

182 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 183 

5. "In the Hittorf experiments on the speed of migra- 
tion of the different ions, the fact observed is the changing 
molecular concentration of the solution about the anode and 
cathode during electrolysis : the extraordinary hypothesis is 
that during the passage of the current the anions and 
cations move in the same electolyte with different velocities, 
and yet the anions and cations are given off at the respec- 
tive electrodes at the same time,'' 

6. In spite of the ionic hypothesis, chemical reactions 
do take place in non-conducting solutions, and these reac- 
tions are similar in result and speed to those which occur 
in conducting aqueous solutions." 

Dr. J. W. Mellor comments upon these facts as follows : 
"The ionic hypothesis cannot, therefore, ignore these ob- 
servations if it is to win a permanent place among the con- 
quests of science." 

The author presents the following hypothesis, based 
upon previous conclusions, as a means of overcoming the 
real and serious difficulties involved in the ionic hypothesis : 

1. All interaction involves the concomitance of ascend- 
ing and descendirig processes. The work increments in- 
volved in the former processes are equal to the work decre- 
ments involved in the latter. For each ascending process 
there will be one descending process. 

2. The products of solution appear as neutral ionic 
pairs. The neutral couples result from the interaction of 
solvent and solute. This assumption is a direct corollary 
of the first assumption. Odd solution components are im- 
possible under the hypothesis of a dual process involving a 
simultaneous and equal augmentation and degradation. 

3. The ions are capable of a three-phase change in- 
volving two work steps, equal in magnitude but opposite 
in their direction. The phase change in the neutral energon 
is concomitant and in the same direction with the phase 
change in the ion. 

4. The phase association is such that the electron ap- 
pears at the high phase, the energon at the neutral phase, 
and the positon at the low phase, 

5. The algebraic sum of the work done in any system 
is zero. We shall consider two cases by way of illustrating 
the application of our hypothesis. 



184 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

113. Case I. Zinc in the Presence of Hydrochloric 

Acid 

Zinc goes into solution, replacing hydrogen and form- 
ing zinc chloride. Hydrogen gas is liberated. Hydrochloric 
acid is in the neutral phase, hydrogen and chlorine existing 
as neutral ions. The difference of potential between metallic 
zinc (low phase) and chlorine (neutral phase) is greater 
than the difference in potential between metallic zinc (low 
phase) and hydrogen (neutral phase), therefore metallic 
zinc (low phase) goes into solution on an ascending grad- 
ient, becoming ionic zinc (neutral phase), replacing the 
ionic hydrogen (neutral phase), which becomes hydrogen 
gas (low phase) along a descending gradient. The algebraic 
sum of the work done in the system is zero because the 
appearance of one positive work unit is concomitant with 
the production of an equal negative work unit. 

114. Case II. The Daniell Cell 

Metallic zinc in the presence of a solution of zinc sul- 
phate. Metallic copper in the presence of a solution of 
copper sulphate. Mechanical mixing of the solutions pre- 
vented by a porous partition. The interaction of water and 
zinc sulphate produces the neutral couples, hydroxidion 
(hydrogen and oxygen), hydrion (neutral hydrogen) ; and 
zincion (neutral zinc), sulphanion (one atom of sulphur, 
four atoms of oxygen) . Similarly the interaction of water 
and copper sulphate produces the neutral couples, hydrox- 
idion (one neutral hydrogen and one neutral oxygen atom) , 
hydrion (neutral hydrogen) ; and dicuprion (neutral cop- 
per ion), sulphanion. We shall use the subscripts h, n, and 
I to signify high, neutral, and low phase, thus : 

Sulphanion (SO4) in the low phase = (SO J , 
Zinc (Zn) in the neutral phase — (Zn) „, etc. 

We must now seek the direction of the stress relief 
gradients in the systems on both sides of the porous parti- 
tion. On the zinc side the difference in potential between 
metallic zinc (Zn) , (zinc, low phase) and sulphanion in the 
neutral phase (SOJ „ is greater than the difference in 
potential between zinc neutral phase (Zn) ^ and (SO J n- 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 185 

Since each work step involves a constant increment or 
decrement in the potential difference, it follows that the 
potential difference between any two ions remains con- 
stant throughout the phase change. Now since the crucial 
ionic pair in the system is the (Zn-SOJ group because 
this involves the greatest potential difference, — (the pos- 
sible combinations are (Zn-H), (Zn-OH), (Zn-S04), 
(H-HO), (H-SOJ, (OH-SOJ, and (Zn«-ZnJ,-itfollows 
that the group (Zn^ -SO J is the determinant of the system 
because its potential difference is greater than (Zn'a-SO^). 
The difference of potential between (Zn) ^ and (Zn)^ is an 
ultimate unit of potential difference hence this group can- 
not be considered. 

In the copper sulphate chamber similar group combina- 
tions can be made by replacing zinc with copper in the above 
groups. The combined systems will strive for the produc- 
tion of a minimum resultant difference of potential. Con- 
sequently the crucial group in the copper-sulphate chamber 
is the group which involves the lowest difference in poten- 
tial because this group will establish the maximum result- 
ant potential difference. Now since the difference in po- 
tential between (Cu)„ and (Cu)^ is one ultimate unit, this 
is the crucial group. The active groups, therefore, are the 
(Zn-SOJ, (Zn^-Zni), (Cu-SOJ, and (Cu„-Cu,), and they 
become the determinants of the resultant potential differ- 
ence or E. M. F. of the complete system. Since the groups 
(Cu^-CUj) and (Zn«-Zn ) both involve one ultimate unit 
of potential difference along oppositely directed gradients, 
the former being descending and the latter ascending, these 
differences neutralize each other. Hence the resultant 
E. M. F. of the cell is determined by the (Cu-SOJ and 
(Zn-SOJ groups. 

Since (SO4) is common to both groups, the determina- 
tion of the E. M. F. of the system reduces to the determina- 
tion of the potential difference between (Zn) and Cu). 
The well-known procedure is as follows : 

(Zn - SO,) - (Cu - SO,) 
= jo.50~(-2.2)} - S-0.60- (2.2)1 ==+2.70-1.60=4-1.10 volt; 
or, Zn — Cu 

= i0.50- (-0.60)1 = 4- 1.10 volts. 



186 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

That the osmotic pressure and solution tension are ulti- 
mately due to the same causes ought to be evident. 

We show diagrammatically, in Fig. 15, the cyclic changes 
which take place in the members of the active groups. 
Ascending processes are represented by arrows pointing 
upward, and descending processes by arrows pointing down- 
ward. The three phases are represented by the subscripts 
h, n, and I attached to the chemical symbols, and the letter 
U means one ultimate work unit which is equal to the prod- 
uct of the electrical charge and the ultimate unit of potential 
difference. The notion that an electrical charge is an inde- 
pendent entity capable of being attached to and detached 
from matter involves insurmountable difficulties. The 
charge is a physico-mathematical concept crystallized out 
of the content of an activity which includes it and all other 
similar crystallizations. The material form of the energy 
or work unit C7 is a three-phase system capable of passing 
through two work steps. At the high phase it is the 
electron, at neutral it is the energon, and at low it is the 
positon. For work to be done a change in phase must take 
place. At the incipiency of the action the members of the 
active groups are neutral and the zinc and copper electrodes 
are at the low phase. Both members of every ionic couple 
are affected during the action. An ascending process in one 
member involves a descending process in the other. The 
positive work is always equal to the negative work in the 
ionic couple. 

The changes which take place in the cell may be analyzed 
into the following steps (shown diagrammatically in Fig. 
15) , without reference to an actual time sequence : 

1. (Cu)tt descends to (Cu),, (SOJ^ ascends to (SOJ^ ; 

2. (Cu) is bivalent and it gives up two work units 
2U to the copper electrode. 

3. In the external circuit 2U ^ (positons) can ascend 
to 2Ufi (energons) doing two ultimate units of work along 
an ascending gradient. 

In the copper sulphate chamber metallic copper (Cu), 
is deposited on the copper electrode. We leave (SO J at 
high phase temporarily while we pass to the consideration 
of the activities in the zinc-sulphate chamber. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 187 

4. (SOJij descends to (SO,) , (Zn)^ ascends to 
(Zn),; 

5. (SOJ is bivalent and it gives up two work units 
2U I to (Zn), (metallic zinc) of the zinc electrode. 

6. (Zn)^ ascends to (Zn) ^ due to the addition of the 
two work units 2(17^ toC/^). Migration takes place and 

(Zn)^ replaces (Cu)^. 

7. (Zn) ^ descends to (Zn) ^ concomitantly with pro- 
cess number 6. 

8. (SO,)^ ascends to (SO^)^ concomitantly with 
(SO4);, descending to (SO J «. 

All the members of the active groups in the electrolytes 
have gone through a cyclic change from the initial neutral 
phase and back to neutral. For every descending process 
there has been an ascending process. Two free positons 
(2U ^) have been given to the copper electrode. In the 
external circuit these two units, in passing from low to 
neutral phase, can do two ultimate units of work along an 
ascending gradient. Corresponding to this ascending pro- 
cess in the external circuit, a descending process from high 
to neutral will set in. 

Electrolytes of different concentrations in the presence 
of electrodes of the same material constitute another form 
of an unbalanced system. In such an unbalanced system 
ascending and descending processes will be established and 
their continuance is assured until the concentrations become 
the same. 

We have previously stated that the concurrent system 
may also be considered as contained within the material 
group. This involves the existence of neutral energons 
within the cell system. Our reactions may be explained from 
this standpoint. The introduction of a positon into the 
concurrent system disturbs the neutrality of one energon 
because it is in the nature of an influx of energy into the 
concurrent system. The energon members of the concurrent 
system must suffer radial expansion when positons are 
introduced in order that the resultant potential difference 
may remain unchanged. One neutral energon is augmented 
into an electron (high phase) for each excitant positon in- 
troduced into the concurrent system. 



188 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

If U is the ultimate unit of work, then, irrespective of 
direction of the gradient, we have 

U = (U, to UJ = (U, to U„) = (U„ to U,) = (U, to U.). 

The positon is an ascending process and may be re- 
garded as positive ( + ) , and it is equal to 4-?7 in magnitude. 
The electron is a descending process and may be considered 
as negative (— ), and it is equal to — U in magnitude. 

The addition of a positon (+U) to one member in- 
volves the addition of an electron ( — U) to another mem- 
ber. If a member is at high phase, then we may regard this 
as being due to the application of a positon to it when at 
neutral. Similarly, from low to neutral involves one posi- 
ton. The application of an electron to a member at high 
will bring it to neutral accompanied by the liberation of an 
energon which rejoins the concurrent system. The ap- 
plication of an electron to a member at neutral reduces it to 
low, with the liberation of a positon. After all, this is merely 
another way of considering ascending and descending pro- 
cesses, the results being identical. 

The cell actions may be set forth in terms of the follow- 
ing reactions : 

In the Copper-Sulphate Chamber 

j (Cu)n — 2U= (Cu) 1+2 Free Positons. Copper deposited. 

l(S04)n + 2U=(S04)h. 

The two free positons pass by way of the copper 
electrode to the external circuit. 

In the Zinc-Sulphate Chamber 

((S04)n — 2U= (804)1+2 free positons which are given 

2. < up to metallic (Zn) 1 of the electrode. 

((Zn)„+2U=(Zn)h. 

/(Zn) 1 (metallic) + 2U = (Zn)n (ionic) metallic zinc goes 

3 . / into solution. 
((Zn)h-2U = (Zn),. 

This leaves (SOJ^^ in the copper-sulphate solution and 
(SOJ^, in the zinc-sulphate solution. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 189 

The external circuit must liberate two positons (+2U) 
for the two received, and these, when they enter the cell, 
augment two energons in the concurrent system into elec- 
trons ( — 2U), hence the cycle is completed by the following 
reactions : 

^(S04) 1+2U (from external circuit) = (S04)n. 
4. <(S04)h — 2U (concurrent electrons) = (804)0+ liberation 
' of two energons back into the concurrent system. 

Summation of U Values 
It is seen that the algebraic sum of the U values in the 
above four steps is equal to zero. 

115. Work of Decomposition. 

Suppose a battery of these cells is used to send a current 
into a solution of hydrochloric acid (HCl) in order to decom- 
pose it. The two members H and CI of the ionic couple are 
neutral, being in solution. For every positon (+U) in- 
troduced into this system an electron ( — U) is formed in the 
concurrent system. When a positon is added to one mem- 
ber of the couple a concurrent electron is added to the other. 
Now since (H) and (CI) are both univalent, we may write 
the reactions as follows : 

(H), + U- (H)^ 

(Cl)tr — U=(C1)^ + the liberation of one positon. 

This leaves (H) and (CI) at high and low phases re- 
spectively, with one work step U intervening to neutral for 
each. The electric current consists, then, in a flow of posi- 
tons in one direction, and the generation of electrons from 
energons in the concurrent system and their flow in the op- 
posite direction — positon through electrons. Mechanical 
energy expended in the current generator produces electrons 
from energons with the concurrent compensating production 
of positons. The cell process liberated positons, with the 
concurrent production of electrons in the concurrent system. 
Activity manifest as primary matter or energons becomes 
secondary matter manifest as positons and electrons; and 
matter is merely a phase of activity. 



190 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



Ex^ternal C treat i. 


Copper 
Electrwie 


Cojaper Guiphafe. 
'Sola tion . 


Zinc Su/p/ia^e 
dotation. 


Zinc 

Electrode 


To 

Siier/tal 
Circuit 

zv} 


(SOX 

(H A 
f) J 


/^4 

t P°i>n 

CZn)^ 1 










(Zn), 






r^U 


® 


<--;, '^''>' 


r^oj/ 



CHAPTER IX 

The Four Worlds 

116. Resume 

In this work we have dealt with interaction in the phys- 
ical universe. We have found that things are interdepend- 
ent and not independent. In their totality they constitute a 
unitary cosmos. The ultimates of things are action centers. 
These action centers manifest in space and time in accord- 
ance with the deterministic dictates of their God-given char- 
acteristics or endowments. The uniformities of physical ac- 
tion may be described in terms of natural laws. Nodal devia- 
tions from finite and partial uniformity are teleological re- 
sultants which are in complete conformity with the prin- 
ciple of non-contradiction. Space and time are forms of ap- 
prehension possessing both objective and subjective signif- 
icance. Because space and time are not things, it does not 
follow that they are unreal. If a certain type of action oc- 
curs when the distance between two things is small, and 
when the distance is increased this action fails to occur, it 
does not follow that space or distance is an action-prohibit- 
ing entity. All that follows from this fact is that, because 
of the change in distance, new arrangements of the activity 
factors have been established by the change in the relative 
location of the things. A change in location involves a 
variation of the quantum of the intervening concurrent sys- 
tem together with a change in the total action setting. If 
a certain type of action fails to appear, we attribute the fail- 
ure to this new action setting and not to any prohibitive 
action of an independent spatial entity. We have seen that 
physical action ultimately depends upon the sustaining in- 
fluence of the Being of God. We look upon the universe as 
due to a free creative act of God. We think of God as both 
Immanent in the cosmos and Transcendent above its finite 
limitations. We find both purpose and teleology in the uni- 

191 



192 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

verse, and we regard both as phases of the principle of non- 
contradiction. 

The scope of this work, being limited to the physical 
universe, prohibits a discussion of its relation to the worlds 
of consciousness and subconsciousness. However, we shall 
briefly outline the direction which the logical development 
of our position must take when the worlds of consciousness 
and subconsciousness are included within the created 
cosmos. 

117. The World of Subconsciousness. 

The stream of consciousness flows, as it were, between 
two banks : one the world of activity, matter, and life ; the 
other the world of subconsciousness. The subconscious 
world is a vast region comparatively unexplored and little 
understood. The bulk of conscious and unconscious experi- 
ence is, as it were, filed away in the eternal vaults of this 
wonderful world. Under certain abnormal conditions the 
vaults are opened and the stored information is again re- 
vealed to conscious minds. The subconscious world is the 
background of our conscious activity, and few are those who 
have not, in some moment of their life, been in rapport with 
the groundwork of conscious life. The extent of this rap- 
port is only a question of degree ; in some individuals it is 
more marked than in others. In passing from the sub- 
conscious to the conscious, reality is differentiated into 
temporal series and spatial appearance through the forms 
of conscious apprehension. Looking through the binocular 
of space and time, the finite self sees reality as the moving 
film of life, the present receding into the past and the future 
moving into the present. The binoculars of space, time, and 
causality would fail us in our differentiation of the world 
of reality unless the distinctions possessed objective signif- 
icance. The finite selves are free factors in the making of 
the film of reality. At the same time we are being molded 
and formed through interaction with the other constituents 
of reality. Our pilgrimage from the most remote of the 
world projections leads us back to God our Creator. The 
principle of non-contradiction, arising from the Being of 
God, like the fountain stream projected high into the atmos- 
phere and into the utmost regions of existence, unifies the 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 193 

contradictions of all finite existence, harmonizing finite be- 
ing with the Reality of the Infinite Creator. 

118. The Inorganic World. 

The inorganic world is the world of physical determin- 
ism and natural law. By natural law we do not mean some 
external governing entity alien to things, but we mean that 
consistent rational record of the action of things which to 
us appears as laws and for things is a partial account of 
the manner of their interaction. In the inorganic world 
the interaction relations between the physical centers is 
equivalent to a well-defined sensitiveness of each center to 
the rest which constitute its environment. The magnitude 
of this sensitiveness grows as the action groups become 
more complex. The sphere of interaction increases with 
this growth in sensitiveness. From monon to mind, the 
growth is continuous. This constitutes the essence of evo- 
lution. By this statement we do not mean that all forms 
of existence are developments from one existence type. The 
great complexity of the universe points to a great diversity 
of beginnings. The attempted unifications and simplifica- 
tions of the various evolutionary schools are, for the most 
part, total failures because they do not begin to do jus- 
tice to the complexity of the cosmos. In the inorganic 
world there is no genuine freedom in the sense of the 
possibility of a new creation which augments the world 
content and the free individual. 

All change is an exchange or interchange according to 
natural law in this purely physical world. The only free- 
dom we find in the inorganic world is the freedom of ex- 
hibiting that given and fixed character of the action center 
which lies at the foundation of natural law. This constant 
display of fixed character is called "determinism." Free- 
dom and determinism are not incompatible. In the con- 
scious world freedom would result in chaos unless exercised 
within the boundaries of physical determinism. Thought 
activities would be ineffective unless focused upon an en- 
vironment which may be defined in terms of principles and 
laws. Thought as free will could find no point from which 
to initiate action, with even the remotest assurance of a 
definite result, unless the physical world, the environment, 



194 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

could be relied upon to react in a definite, determinable 
manner. 

119. The Organic World and the Entity of Life. 

In the inorganic world all is mechanism as far as 
phenomenal appearance is concerned. As the created work 
of God, the inorganic world is more than mechanism, for 
God expresses His Eternal Reality in the inorganic world by 
His Immanence in conjunction with His Eternal Transcend- 
ence. Consequently the inorganic world is more than a mere 
machine. For this reason science cannot explain the physical 
universe in terms of mechanism alone. In one sense of the 
word, the monon is an individual if separateness or dis- 
creteness is all that is meant by individuality. Mere dis- 
creteness, however, is not a criterion of genuine individ- 
uality, for it conveys the implication of being a part of a 
larger totality which itself may constitute a real individual 
if the system is an interacting unity, as we have been forced 
to assume. A contentless number is a mere mathematical 
abstraction. Consequently the number one is not a real 
unity because it is a conceptual abstraction devoid of con- 
tent. Unity, then, is continuity of activity, a persistence of 
exhibition of definite characteristics throughout a multiplic- 
ity of change. This idea of unity does not involve the neces- 
sity of discrete physical parts, for continuity throughout 
change is the essence of unity. This is the type of unity 
exhibited by the soul. It does not follow that because the 
soul is not composed of discrete parts it is a mere mathe- 
matical abstraction. The soul is a higher form of unity 
whose activity content is manifold. The life entity is a 
unity of the same order as the soul entity. The distinction 
between these two types of unitary entities is to be found 
more in degree than in type or kind. The fact that the life 
and soul entities are unities of a higher order than the 
merely physical unities does not preclude the conjunction of 
these unities into resultant unities of another order, for we 
have already shown that unity devoid of multiplicity 
is a mere mathematical abstraction. We hold that the 
phenomena of life and consciousness have not been and can- 
not be explained by any system of philosophy, no matter 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 195 

how subtle in its excruciating verbosity, which tries to 
merge the three essences of cosmic reality — that is, the 
physical essence, the life essence, and the soul essence — into 
one primordial parent entity type which is capable of de- 
veloping or evolving into the higher types through interac- 
tion in an environment composed of nothing but these same 
primordial existence types. This is exactly what modern 
philosophical evolution tries to do. The attempt is an 
ignominious failure. Differences cannot arise out of same- 
ness. If we place one hundred marbles in a box and shake 
them with utmost vigor, we get nothing other than one hun- 
dred marbles for our effort. Our effort does not produce 
one apple even if we add another hundred marbles to the 
original number. This popular modern intellectual mania 
seems to break out continuously in an attempt to evolve the 
complex all out of the simple one. This intellectual mania 
is such a common malady that he who refrains from join- 
ing these modern scientific dervishes is charged with being 
simple-minded and demented. We maintain that religious 
intuition is nearer to the truths of ultimate reality than all 
the subtle speculations of these modern sophists. We con- 
tend that the organic center is a resultant unity arising 
through conjunction and interaction between the life center 
and suitable aggregates of inorganic centers. We extend 
the principle of interaction to the organic world. In the 
monons we find basic fundamental characteristics common 
to all. Nevertheless, we recognize differences in the char- 
acteristics of the monons. The physical universe cannot 
be generated out of mere number. Similarly we recognize 
differences in the life ultimates. We shall give the name 
vitons to these life ultimates. Like the monons, the vitons 
are capable of exhibiting positive and negative action 
phases in conformity with the principle of non-contradiction. 
Throughout all the worlds of being, this differentiation of 
unity into a positive and a negative phase is found. In 
the conscious world we find the unity differentiated into 
pleasure and pain, good and evil, truth and error. In the 
organic world the center is responsive to the modeling in- 
fluence of environment and it exhibits the rudiments ol 
individuality. 



196 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

120. The Conscious World and the Entity of Soiil. 

The problem of operation, control, and interaction is 
more difficult when we ascend the thermometer of organized 
life and reach the more complex groups. In the more com- 
plex groups we find the nervous systems whose functionings 
provide for the handling of the mechanical problems in- 
volved in the operation and control of the bodily move- 
ments, thus making possible the representation and real- 
ization of such desires and interests as tend toward the 
further development of a harmonic individuality. In the 
highest organic complexity, the human body, we find con- 
sciousness fully developed. The conscious being is a re- 
sultant unity arising through the conjunction and interac- 
tion between the soul and suitable aggregates of organic 
centers. Thus the principle of interaction is extended to 
the world of consciousness. Creation did not cease when 
God created the physical universe. Free creation is dis- 
tinctive of conscious life; in fact, it is one of its highest 
forms of expression. Our concept of God must therefore 
include creation as an abiding form of expression of the 
infinite Being. God's Immanence and Transcendence as- 
sure the continuous responsive expression of His Free 
Creation in the cosmos. The creation of souls is an ex- 
pression of the Infinite and Non-Temporal Being of God 
manifest and immanent in the finite world of space, time, 
and secondary causation. The resultant unitary being 
which is produced by the conjunction and interaction of 
the soul with the organic system develops into complete 
consciousness contemporaneously with the observable de- 
velopment of the organic, nervous, and brain structure. 
In the conscious world individuality begins to assert itself 
in a pronounced and distinct manner by attempting to re- 
construct its environment. This attempt is a primary 
manifestation of the will. Moreover, there is noticeable an 
attempt to interpret environment, and this constitutes the 
beginning of knowledge or cognition. This is what we call 
mentality, and thus arises the unitary world of mind, which 
may be differentiated into thought as will and thought as 
cognition. Introspection separates mental activity into the 
two principal components, will and cognition. In reality 
they are never found divorced. Sometimes will appears to 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 197 

be on the crest of mind life, at other times it is cognition, 
but this appearance of dualism is due to the ineffectual at- 
tempts of mind to catch all of itself in one single moment 
of time. Mechanism becomes the servant of consciousness 
with the development of the unitary being. Consciousness 
demands the performance of certain movements with the 
minimum of effort. The nervous system, begining as mere 
reaction to the simplest stimuli, develops into a complex 
mechanism in accordance with the requirements of soul life. 
Soul life and physical mechanism blend into one unitary 
life, and perfect interaction exists in all the stages of de- 
velopment. Conscious soul life is the non-spatial phase of 
the life of mind ; the neural processes are the spatial mani- 
festations of that activity. The brain and the nervous sys- 
tem are like the cutting edges of the two blades of a pair 
of shears. Whenever the psychical movement is effective 
within the world of space and time there the cutting edges 
are in action. The interacting, moving content of the soul 
life propels the action in a direction which is the resultant 
of this soul content. Genuine freedom means that activ- 
ity is given its course from the organized soul content. 
Thought as will produces new thought solutions tending 
toward action. Thought as cognition produces new thought 
creations. Both thought as will and thought as cognition 
are phases of the unitary life of the soul, 

121. Relation Between the Conscious and the Subconscious 
Worlds. 
The interaction between the soul and its organic 
mechanism may vary in intensity. When the interaction is 
sharply defined and of the maximum intensity, then con- 
scious awareness is at its highest level. There is also a 
lowest level corresponding to that minimum intensity of 
interaction which is capable of producing conscious aware- 
ness. These limits themselves may vary because of other 
interaction conditions. However, conscious life may be said 
to be bounded by a high and a low level of interaction. Be- 
low the low level we have the subconscious life of the soul. 
There the results of intense interaction — that is, conscious 
life — are stored for all eternity. There the precipitates of 
all conscious activity are preserved as the everlasting rec- 



198 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

ords of temporal life. We may say, then, that soul life has 
a transcendent and an immanent phase. The immanent 
phase corresponds to the conscious life, while the trans- 
cendent phase corresponds to the subconscious life. In this 
respect the life of the soul is somewhat similar to the Life 
of God. One important difference lies in the fact that the 
soul did not create its organic mechanism. There is one 
striking similarity, that is, the Life of God does not depend 
upon the continued existence of the cosmos which He cre- 
ated, and the life of the soul continues after dissociation 
with the organic mechanism. We know very little concern- 
ing subconscious interaction. Many indications point to 
the fact that the soul is capable of subconscious interac- 
tion, but we know little of the modus operandi. The sub- 
conscious content may be, as it were, the glass through 
which the soul sees God dimly. The religious intuition of 
the primitive is not mere superstition. It is grounded in 
a deeper reality than superstition. The universality of the 
religious intuition points to a common background of con- 
scious soul life ; that is, the subconscious soul content. Thus 
man is truly made in the Image of God. 

122. The Categories of Reality. 

Keality may be distinguished as Absolute and Relative. 
These two manifestations are not isolated and estranged 
existence types constituting alien dualistic principles hav- 
ing no binding ties or interrelations. True unity is brought 
about only through interrelations. In this sense, therefore, 
the Absolute Reality and the Relative Reality constitute a 
unity despite the fact that they are not identical. A unity 
which merges the Absolute into the Relative or the Rela- 
tive into the Absolute cannot be constructed philosophic- 
ally except by resorting to the idea of interrelations between 
multiplicity, which then merges multiplicity into unity. If 
it is thought that the word "unity" lends profundity to 
philosophic contemplation, then we have as much right to 
claim unity for our two types of reality as those phil- 
osophers who attempt to remove any distinction between 
these two types. There must be differences in the content 
of multiplicity if a real unity can be established. A unity 
without distinctions and variations in its content is a mere 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 199 

mathematical abstraction. Hence we maintain that our 
position is no more dualistic than that of the most subtle 
monist whose principal endeavor it is to merge multiplicity 
into unity. The monist denies that his endeavor results in 
an identity, nevertheless he charges us with gross lack of 
philosophic insight and acumen whenever we apply his own 
procedure to a content, grounded in fact, which will, when 
developed to its logical conclusion, exhibit a genuine re- 
ligious value. We speak of reality as relative in order to 
emphasize the fact that it owes its significance to the Ab- 
solute Reality — God. Moreover, Relative Reality is rela- 
tive by virtue of genuine and real relations to God. We 
may formulate the categories of reality as follows: 

ABSOLUTE REALITY 
GOD 

A Timeless Transcendent Reality, Immanent in 
Temporal Finiteness 

The Absolute is non-spatial, non-temporal, and capable 
of Absolute Free Origination. God is therefore the Pri- 
mary Causation in distinction to Secondary Causation, 
which manifests in finiteness in conjunction with the 
forms of space and time. God is Absolute Truth, Abso- 
lute Freedom, and Perfection; therefore His Omniscience 
and Omnipotence follow as logical consequents. God is the 
Absolute Creative Being. 

Relative Reality 
7. The Inorganic World 
The inorganic world is subdivided into: 
1. The Primary World, composed of: 

a. Monons, the primordial form of activity 

centers. 

b. Energons, the gyratory groups composed of 

monons. 
These gyratory energons constitute our concurrent sys- 
tem of primary matter which interacts with secondary 
matter in the production of physical phenomena. The 
energons are the neutral phase of matter. 



200 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

2. The Secondary World, composed of 

a. Electrons, the negative phases of the energons. 

b. Positons, the positive phases of the energons. 
These groups constitute the excitant system of sec- 
ondary matter which generates physical phenomena through 
interaction with the concurrent system or primary neutral 
matter. Complex material aggregates are built up from 
these secondary elementals. 

Principal Characteristic of the Inorganic Centers 

1. Capable of self-maintenance. 

2. Capable of definite physical combinations. 

3. Limited or deterministic sensitiveness to en- 
vironment. 

4. No genuine creative freedom. 

5. Differing in many characteristics. 

//. The Organic World 
We subdivide the organic world into: 

1. Primary Activity composed of Vitons manifesting 
the Principle of life. The Vitons are the Life Ultimates. 
We may say that the Vitons are elementary Souls lacking 
that potentiality which insures development into the highest 
form of conscious life. The Vitons differ in many of their 
fundamental characteristics. All Vitons manifest the Prin- 
ciple of Life given to them by a creative act of God, who is 
the Source of Life. God's ever present Immanence insures 
to every organism an elementary soul or viton which is in 
harmony with its being. 

2. A Secondary Activity composed of groups of vary- 
ing complexity built up of secondary matter. The organic 
molecular groups are generally very complex. 

The resultant unitary organic center is due to the con- 
junction and interaction of the Primary Activity of the 
Viton and the Secondary Activity of Secondary Matter. Be- 
cause of its content of secondary matter, the organic center 
can interact with primary matter. 

Principal Characteristics of the Organic Center 

1. Capable of self-maintenance. 

2. Capable of definite physical combinations. 

3. A greater sensitiveness to environment. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 201 

4. Capable of exhibiting an indeterminate creative im- 
pulse ; that is, limited freedom. 

5. Differing in many characteristics. 

///. The Conscioics World 
The conscious world may be subdivided into : 

1. A Primary Activity composed of Souls manifesting 
the Principle of Free Individuality. Herein lies the dis- 
tinction between the Soul and the Viton. The soul is of 
God through His act of creation. 

2. A Secondary Activity composed of highly developed 
organic systems capable of minute shades of responsive 
interaction. 

The resultant unitary conscious center arises through 
conjunction and interaction of the soul with its organic 
system. Development is not precluded by this interaction, 
but, on the contrary, it is fostered by it. The modeling 
influence of environment is included as a fact due to gen- 
eral interaction. 

Principal Characteristics of the Conscious Center 

1. Capable of self -maintenance. 

2. Capable of definite physical combinations. 

3. A highly attuned sensitiveness to environment. 

4. Capable of reconstructing its environment. This 
tendency constitutes the basic root of the will. 

5. Capable of producing new thought solutions tend- 
ing toward action. This is thought as will. 

Results in the production of the moral structure. 

6. Capable of interpreting its environment. This ten- 
dency constitutes the basic root of cognition. 

7. Capable of producing new thought creations. This 
is thought as cognition. Results in the production of art, 
literature, science, and philosophy. 

8. Capable of expressing a more complete individuality 
through the exercise of a freedom which is only partially 
limited by the necessary conditions of action imposed by 
environment. 

IV, The Subconscious World 
We may differentiate soul life into : 

1. A Primary Activity consisting in the soul life below 
the lowest level of consciousness. 



202 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

2. A Secondary Activity consisting in the conscious life 
brought about by interactions between the soul and the 
organic system above the lowest level of consciousness. 

The subconscious world pertains to the primary activity 
of soul life. Although the content of this primary or sub- 
conscious activity is for the greater part conjectural, never- 
theless we have a quantum of evidence which at least indis- 
tinctly indicates some phases of this hidden content. It is 
highly probable that this subconscious phase of soul activity 
is capable of and includes within its content: 

1. The indestructible record of perceptions, conscious 
thoughts, and acts. 

2. Producing the so-called abnormal psychical phe- 
nomena. 

3. Interaction with other primary subconscious 
activities. 

4. Projecting portions of its content above the lowest 
level of consciousness under suitable conditions of inter- 
action. 

5. Receiving certain types of direct or intuitive knowl- 
edge and revelation. 

6. The groundwork of instinctive responsiveness. 

7. The groundwork of the intuitions of religion and 
faith in an ethical order. 

123. Chance and Predetermination. 

Is life a mere rattling of the chains of finite serfdom? 
Are the links in the chain of life forged before our advent 
into the arena of finite existence? If we reject this view, 
are all events merely the chaotic outcome of chance and con- 
tingency? We take the position that both these views are 
erroneous because they are the extremes of a view which 
includes a modified interpretation of both. In creative 
art we find the essence of a genuine freedom. Conscious 
life cannot be predicted with any greater certainty than art, 
which owes its novelty to the mental content and depth of 
penetration of the artist's mind. Art owes its existence to 
the initiative and creative constructiveness of the artist. 
This is all that can be asked for freedom. If environment 
is the only factor in the making of an individual, then two 
minds in the same environment should be as like as two 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 203 

peas in a pod. We do know, however, that in the same home 
two children carve out different mental worlds for them- 
selves from the same environment. Without freedom's 
creative impulse, the conscious world would show but little 
diversity. True, you will grant, but individual differences 
are themselves factors that are predetermined and as such 
have previously existed somewhere. In other words, no 
really new element is to be found in the entire realm of con- 
scious life. This is a fatalism which chains the soul to 
eternal serfdom. A past which is a genuine past, and as 
such does not exist, can have no determinate influence upon 
the present in producing the future. Given the artist and 
his mental content, no one can predict the nature of the 
work of art. The result is a genuine novelty, unaccountable 
and unpredictable. If all the mental content is known to a 
greater mind, then only is prediction possible. We can 
mean nothing less by prediction than that certain results 
have been brought about before they can be observed as phe- 
nomenal facts. Even in the realm of logic the creative 
principle of freedom reforms a world content into startling 
and novel combinations. The physical world in which we 
live is a world of determinism, understandable in terms of 
natural laws. The mechanistic elements of our body belong 
to the world of determinism. 

This constitutes the physical logic of the universe. With- 
out this background, rational action is impossible. A knowl- 
edge of this world of predictable and definite consequences 
is part of the content of mind gained through interaction 
with environment. All we can ask is our share in the crea- 
tive activity of a world which includes physical deter- 
minism. This is the only form in which predetermination 
enters as an influencing element in our creative activity. 
In fact, creative activity requires this known and definite 
foundation for its expression and realization. Our soul 
content is the fountain from which action arises. Although 
action is dependent upon mind content, nevertheless the soul 
is able to originate and create new thought and action 
departures. The chance element is in the nature of an 
opportunity to originate and initiate. Chance as a chaotic 
contingency is not found in the world of consciousness. All 
action proceeds from the content of the self. The new does 



204 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

not arise from chaos, but from the cosmos of the self. Love 
and logic find no room in fatalism, that dark hand from a 
remorseless beyond, which drags the self hither and thither 
with predetermined precision, calculated by the infernal 
master mind of a being inimical to all forms of genuine 
self-expression. Fatalism annihilates individuality. The 
two cannot exist together. A thing whose movements are 
prearranged and controlled is not an individual, but a 
machine. At the time of the act it (the act) is characteris- 
tic of the self which then exists. The act is a deputy of the 
soul content which brings it into being. Freedom does not 
mean that you, being what you are at this moment, can 
act in a manner which differs from the resultant of your 
momentary mind content. You are what your action re- 
sponses (reactions) to an active environment have made 
you. You may become a radically different self due to your 
last act. Your self is not a static thing; it is a dynamic 
action center changing during interaction. As your self 
develops into a fuller individuality, a greater world of 
spiritual content, your resultant acts partake of a larger and 
more significant freedom. It may now be maintained that 
our arguments have led us back to determinism, for have 
we not admitted that the agent's act is a mere result of his 
soul content at the given time? The agent could not have 
acted in a different manner, and consequently the inference 
is that the agent is absolutely determined. We grant this 
without hesitation because this is what we mean by a 
rational freedom, but we do not grant that the act was 
determined for the agent, but by the free choice of his own 
individuality or self. Genuine freedom is a measure of the 
magnitude of the individuality; it does not measure the 
magnitude of some other alien self. Our freedom is in the 
nature of a creative determinateness and not an external 
absoluteness or manifestation of chaotic chance. The crea- 
tive work of art finds its expression in and through a me- 
chanical system. The physical world and nature consti- 
tute the instrument of expression of spiritual values. Mind 
is not a compound formed by association of a number of 
unrelated and separate content units. It is rather a growth 
by differentiation from a unity which pervades the con- 
scious being and the physical universe. We hold, there- 
fore, that the unitary being of the soul is free in its activity 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 205 

expressions, that its activity expressions are genuine self- 
expressions and not expressions of some external agent, 
and that the manner of the activity expressions is influ- 
enced and partially controlled by the necessities imposed 
by environment. 

124. The Assurance of Immortality. 

The finite self longs for the transformation of the dis- 
cords of life into harmonious forms. This is the main- 
spring of life and the root of hope. The path of discord 
leads the finite self out of itself and beyond itself in the con- 
templation of a condition of existence in v^hich its loftiest 
desires may find their completion. In the final analysis we 
desire that the best in us shall persist. The best in us in- 
cludes what is beyond us. The finite self seeks its fuller 
expression in a perfection which cannot be realized during 
finite life. Souls are hurled, as it were, from the Heart of 
the Infinite into the temporal world of discord and experi- 
ence, where they are moulded into self-conscious beings of 
thinking wills seeking perfection because aware of imper- 
fection, and living in hope of an ultimate return to a timeless 
world of perfection and harmony. The universality of this 
hope is the greatest natural law in the universe. It is the 
source of that feeling of certainty that our finite self will not 
be denied the realization of its desire for a fuller expression 
in a life beyond this. If this feeling is mere superstition, 
then the world becomes meaningless. The universal belief 
in immortality cannot be a mere development from experi- 
ence and environment. Even the most primitive of the an- 
cient races of mankind held the belief in immortality in 
some form. This belief could not have arisen in the primi- 
tive mind from experience and environmentc Physical evi- 
dence showed primitive man nothing but an absolute end 
with the death of the body. Therefore we maintain that the 
belief in immortality is more than belief: it is a universal 
factor in the subconscious content of the conscious self. No 
matter how subtle the attempt may be to derive the belief 
from experience, the universal evidence of bodily death con- 
stitutes a universally true fact out of which a normal mind 
can derive nothing but an absolute negation of immortality. 
Despite this observation, the fact of bodily death has em- 
phasized the belief in immortality. Therefore the normal 



206 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

mind is either universally inconsistent and incapable of 
deriving correct inferences from facts, or the belief in im- 
mortality is grounded in the depths of reality and is known 
as an eternal verity to the subconscious phase of soul life. 
We hold that the subconscious v^orld is nearer the Gates of 
Paradise than the intellectual w^orld built upon a substruc- 
ture of logical inference. We maintain that the revelations 
v^hich reach the conscious world via the subconscious are 
truer glimpses of the Life Eternal than the manufactured 
products of the logical laboratories. Hence we regard the 
assurance of immortality as a God-given endowment to the 
subconscious phase of soul life. This eternal verity, known 
as such to subconsciousness, therefore appears in conscious- 
ness as a persistent and necessary intuitional truth which 
finds no definite point of entry in the scheme of logic. Im- 
mortality finds its place as the complement of the intent of 
reality. Logic and reason cannot determine the type or 
form which this fuller experience will assume beyond death. 
The link of personal recollections is not shattered by death. 
In the fuller life our demand for a growing and higher ex- 
perience will find its satisfaction. 

CONCLUDING EEMAUKS 

Looking in retrospect upon the matter presented in this 
work, we fully realize that a mere suggestive outline of 
possibilities has been presented. It is our hope that suffi- 
cient possibilities have been outlined to interest others in 
the further development of this spiritual concept of the 
physical universe. 

We have found that the Spirit of God manifests in the 
microcosm and in the macrocosm, in the unconscious as well 
as in the subconscious and conscious, in the monon and 
viton as well as in the most complex form of mental life. 
The world is a created revelation of a Timeless Reality in 
temporal finiteness. The intent of this Timeless Reality 
deferred in time leaves the imprint of purpose and teleology 
throughout the universe. The temporal desire for harmony 
with the Timeless Reality is a world teleology which points 
toward Absolute Truth, Absolute Freedom, and the Har- 
mony of Finite Being with the Life of God. 



APPENDIX A 

A Non-Newtonian Development of the Planetary 

Orbits 

125. The Planetary Orbits According to the Space-Time Po- 
tential. 

In our development of the planetary orbits we shall 
make use of no other relations than those set forth in statics 
and dynamics. Moreover, we shall make no use of the New- 
tonian inverse square hypothesis. The central force notion 
of Newton we shall abandon for an assumption which con- 
tains within itself a sufficient physical reason for an orbit of 
unequal axes. A single constant central force contains 
within itself no physical reason to account for such a modi- 
fication of a circular orbit. In the plane of the orbit we 
shall introduce two unequal force factors acting in a two- 
directional manner. Moreover, we shall assume that space 
is a sense chart of position values in such a manner that 
the location of a thing in space is determined by the direc- 
tional intensity of the interaction at the particular position. 
Furthermore, we shall suppose that space is not an obstacle 
to interaction, but a measure of the relative intensity. These 
are the basic suppositions of our Space-Time Potential in 
accordance with which we shall now investigate the orbital 
motion of a body in a plane of space. 

Let the components of the activity intensities in any 
given plane AA of space, chosen, for the sake of convenience, 
at right angles to each other, be of equal magnitude, then 
the intensity of the action or stress upon any plane BB 
perpendicular to the given plane AA and making any angle 
whatsoever with the direction of the components, will be 
of equal magnitude. In other words, the resultant of the 
tangential and normal stresses on the plane BB will be equal 
to the resultant of these stresses if plane BB is revolved 
into any other position CC, 

A body free to move in a plane AA subjected to such 
activity conditions will move in a circular orbit and will be 

207 



208 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

in dynamic equilibrium in this orbit. The radius r of this 
orbit will remain a constant equal to the initial radius ob- 
served for the given body assumed to move in the plane AA. 

If the observed orbit is not circular, then the stress com- 
ponents are unequal in magnitude. 

If the stress components are unequal, then the orbit of 
the body is a conic section. The type of the conic depends 
upon the relative magnitude of the stress intensities. 

We shall now investigate the activity conditions prevail- 
ing in a plane subjected to a two-directional stress system of 
unequal intensities. 

For purposes of analysis let us take any plane AAA^A^^ 
in space (see Fig. 16). The resultants of the activity fact- 
ors outside of the limiting boundary of this particular space 
AAA^Aj^ may be reduced to the intensity factors Fy, Fy, 
equal in magnitude but opposite in direction ; and F^, Fx, 
also equal in magnitude and acting in opposite directions. 
As far as the plane AAA^A^ is concerned, the external activ- 
ity factors are in equilibrium. This assumption is therefore 
in complete accord with the general procedure in dynamics 
as well as in statics. The general case of the above is when 
Fy is not equal to Fx* 

In Fig. 17 we have resolved the intensity factor Fy into 
a tangential component Ty and a normal component Ny with 
reference to the plane BB, 



In the triangle PQR we have 



N 
sin^ = :pr^ and Ny = Fy.sin 



Similarly, 



T 

cos^ = t=^ and Ty = Fy.cos^. 



Since the axis XX is perpendicular to the direction of Fy, 
it follows that a unit area along XX corresponds to an area 
along BB found from the following relation : 

A A 

sin 6 = -r-^, hence Ab = -r-^ • 
^ Ab sin ^ 

Now since Ax = 1, it follows that the corresponding area 

along BB is given by 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 209 

If 7 = intensity of the action per unit of area upon any- 
plane BB and / = the magnitude of this action upon an 
area A^, it follows that 

Hence it is clear that the unit area intensity of the normal 
component N^y along BB is expressed by 

Ny = - ^ . — ^; because AB = l-^sin6. 
^ l-^smp* 

Consequently, 

Ny = Fy.sin* ^. 

Similarly, we have for the unit area intensity of the tangen- 
tial component Ty along BB, 

^ Fy . cos B T-. n ' n 

Ty = T-^^ — : — ^ = Fy.cos ^.sin 6. 
^ l-^sm ^ ^ 

Referring to Figures 17 and 18, we find that Ny and iV« act 
in the same direction, while Ty and Tx act in opposite direc- 
tions. If we regard the components of Fy as positive, then 
Ng is positive and T* is negative. 

Considering a unit area along YY, we have in the same 
manner as above, 

1 _ 1 

sin (90°-^) cos^' 
Moreover, from triangle PLM we find 

cosg=^^ and N,==-f F^.cos^. 

Furthermore, we obtain the relation 

— T 
sin ^ = -^ and Tj=-Fj.sinp. 

For unit area intensities we have 

The negative sign has been introduced here since Tg acts in a 

direction opposite to Ty. Combining similar components of 

Fy and Fx, we obtain 

N (the total normal component) =Ny+Nx, 

= Fy.sin» p+F,.cos« P 



210 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

T (the total tangential component) 

*=Fy.cos p. sin p — Fx.sin ^.coa ^, 
«sin p. cos &(Fy-Fx). 

In Fig. 19 the resultant R of N and T is given by the line PV, 
It is evident that 

Substituting the values of N and T in this equation, we have 
R^VtFy.sin^p+Fx.cos^^l^+lsinp.cospCFy-Fx)}* 
=\/ 1 Fy . sin2 g+Fx . cos2 g ) 2+ { sin^ g . cos^ g (Fy - FJ* 
R^VFyM sin^P+sin^g.cos'&l+FxMcos^g+si n^&.cos^^l 
+2Fy.Fx{sin2p.cos2^-sin2g.cos2^. 
Since (sin^^.cos'g— sin^p.cos^p} =0, the expression becomes 

R-\/FyMsm*&+sin2p.cos2p}+F,Mcos^&+sin2g.cos2pi 

=-^/Fy^sin2plsin2p-fcos2pl+Fx^cos2g|cos2p+sin2pl. 
The value (sin'p-|-cos^g) = l, consequently the last expression 
reduces to 

R = V^T^sm^l+lvTcoPJ. (In Fig. 19, R = PV.) 

The resultant R makes the angle 9 with the plane BB. 
This is evident from Fig. 19, from which we see that 

tan 9 = 1 «BPV = <PVW = 9). 

By substituting the values of N and T in this equation we have 

Fy.sin^g+Fx.cos^ g 
^^'''P"sin&.cos&(Fy-F,) 

If we divide both numerator and denominator of this last 
expression by cos* p, we obtain 

Fy.sin* P Fx.cos* & 
cos^ P cos* & Fy.tan* 3+F, 

^°'^ sin&.cosp i7i;T'tanfiiFy-Fxi * 
cos*& \ "" 1 
In Fig. 19, let 6 = angle between PV (i. e. R) and PZ (the 
direction of Fy). The following relation holds good: 

e=(p-9) 

Consequently, 

tan g- tan y 
tane = tan(&~9)=i^_tanp.tun9* 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 211 

If we substitute the value of tan 9 obtained above in this last 
expression we have 

tan Fytan'3+F. 

tan 6 = 



1-ftan 



( Fy.tan^g+F, ) 
^\tan e(Fy-F,)/ 



tan^g.Fy-tan2&.F;,~tan2g.Fy-F^ 
tan p [(Fy-F,)+ (Fy.tan^ g+F,)] 

~tan^p.Fx-F^ -F^Cl+tan^ P) 

tan &.Fy4-tan ^(Fy.tan^ g) tan &.Fy(l+tan2 p) 

Hence, 

F F 

tan e«~ ^ ■' o = -Tr.cot g. 
Fy.tan p Fy *^ 

Let y = Fy.sin g and g = F^.cos ft; then, since 
R=W-sin2 &4-F,2.cos' ^ 

This equation, being of the second degree, is a conic section. 

Let the coordinates of any point D on this curve (see 
Fig. 20) be x, y. To construct the conic, proceed as follows : 
With point P as a center, describe the outer circle with a 
radius Fy, Similarly, draw the inner circle with a radius 
Fx, since Fy has been assumed greater than Fx. 

Any point D on the curve of the conic must satisfy the 
relation ij* = 2/' -j- x\ 

Take P^ = x = F, . cos g and 
PjE; = y = Fy.sinp, 

where angle /3 is the angle which the plane BB makes with 
the Y axis. 

These values of x and y determine any point D of the 
curve. 

We may locate any point D of the curve by the following 
method : In Fig. 20, PC is constructed perpendicular to the 
plane BB, From the point C where PC intersects the outer 
circle, line CE is constructed perpendicular to the Y axis 
and consequently parallel to the X axis. From the point of 
intersection G of PC and the inner circle, line FG is drawn 
parallel to the X axis. Also from point G, line GD is made 
parallel to the Y axis. The intersection of lines GD and CE 
determines the point D in the curve. Moreover, the line PD, 



212 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

connecting points P and D, is the radius vector of the curve, 
and it is commensurate with R, the resultant stress upon the 
plane BB. Furthermore, the direction of line PD repre- 
sents the inclination of the resultant stress to the plane BB. 
That this construction satisfies the relations 

y = F,.sin ^, and x=«=Fx.cos g 

will now be shown. 

In Fig. 20, the construction is such that 

PC= Fy; PG = F,; PE = y; and FG= ED = x. 
Moreover, the following relations are true ; 
angle CPE = (90° — /?), and 

PI? 

cos(90°~&)=|g; PE = PC{cos(90°~g)l=Fy.sin g-y; 

FP 
sin(90**-e)«^; FG = PG{sin(90°-Wl =-F,.cos p = x. 

It is evident that 

PD* = PE*-f-ED^ and, consequently, 
R»«y2-f-x« = Fy^sin2 p-f F,^cos^ p. 
Furthermore, 

tan < DPE«p^= j.-^ = jT^.cot p. 

We have seen that 

F 
— pT.cot p = tan 6, therefore 

tan<DPE = tane, and <DPE = <e. 
In Fig. 20 the resultant PD = R is in the first quadrant, and 
the inclination angle 9 which it makes with the plane BB is 
therefore greater than angle g, consequently, 
<p = e+P and e = (9-p). 
Hence tan 6 = tan (9 — P). By proceeding as above we 
find that 

tan(9-p)«-f~.cotp. 

which is the same value as obtained for tan (p — 9) with the 
opposite algebraic sign. 
Hence 

F 
tan 6-+^. cot p. 

Consequently, the construction satisfies the necessary conditions 
imposed by the fundamental relations previously developed. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 213 

We shall now prove that the extremity of the radius vector 
H traces a conic. Referring again to Fig. 20, we find that 

LLS^J^^^^^, since FG^DE', 
^y' PC^ CE' CE' CE' 
but CE^-LE(KE); therefore 

Fy2 LE(KE)' 
Since KE ^{¥y-y) and L^=(Fy-fy), it follows that 

PV x^ x« 

F/^(Fy-hy)(Fy-y) (F,^-y«)' 
which gives 

F,HFy»-y«)«F/.x«,or 
Fy»x2+F,V-F,«.Fy«, 

which is the equation of a conic. 

If the terms of this expression be divided by F,*.Fy*, we 
obtain the equation in its most easily recognized form as follows: 

— 4-^ = 1 

In this form we readily recognize the conic as an ellipse. 
It is apparent that the type of the conic depends upon the 
relative magnitude of the activity factors F, and Fy. If 
these factors are equal to each other, the conic becomes a 
circle. If they are unequal in magnitude, the curve is an 
ellipse which tends toward a parabola when the ratio of 
their intensities approaches an infinite value. Conversely, 
if the orbit is an ellipse, the activity factors prevailing in 
the plane of the orbit are unequal in their magnitude. For 
negative values of F„^ the curve becomes an hyperbola. 

An exhaustive investigation of a material system inter- 
acting according to the Space-Time Potential involves a 
reference to a three-directional system of coordinate axes. 
The space of sense is most conveniently regarded as a triply 
extended manifold. The Newtonian hypothesis is primarily 
a one-directional vectorial system regarding the sun as a 
central force. The one-directional attraction between the 
sun and the earth is, according to Newton, a sufficient reason 
for the earth's orbit type. We cannot agree with this con- 
venient simplification, for the reason that any finite portion 
of a plane in space must be under the influence of a two- 
directional activity system. In this manner only are we able 



214 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

to include all the activity factors within the plane beyond 
the confines of the finite portion considered. By referring 
the finite portion to an X and a Y axis all activity factors 
in the plane will be either above or below the X axis and to 
the left or the right of the Y axis. 

We conclude, from the above mathematical analysis, 
that a body free to move under the action of the unequal 
forces Fy and F^, in the plane AAA^A^ will describe a locus 
consistent with the requirements that the resultant R of the 
unequal activity factors shall, for all points of the locus, 
satisfy the relation 



R=Wsin2 ^-f F,2.cos2 % 

That the locus is a conic section has already been shown. 

We shall now supplement the above statical analysis by 
two additional proofs based upon the laws of dynamics. It 
is to be noted that the Newtonian inverse square hypothesis 
has been discarded. 

126. The Keplerian Relations according to the Space-Time 

Potential. 

Let us now consider the problem from another stand- 
point. In Fig. 21, let the radius PR of the inner circle RG^A 
be commensurate with a force Fx, and let the radius PK of 
the outer circle KC^B be commensurate with a force Fy, The 
distance RK is then commensurate with (Fy — F,). Let 
point N be the mid-point of the distance RK and let 
e = RN = NK, The circle NN^Nz passing through point N 
and having P as its center is then the mid-locus of the ring 
area KBAR. The length RN = NK = e. is therefore com- 
mensurate with (Fy — Fx) -^ 2, and the locus NNjNg may 
be regarded as a neutral locus. In order that the action 
which we are about to investigate may be easily understood 
we shall imagine that the body is connected to the origin P 
by a resistive spiral spring. At first we shall confine the 
direction of the motion of the body to the line RK, More- 
over, we shall assume that initially the body is located at the 
mid-point N in the neutral locus NN^N., The movable body 
may then be displaced through the distance NK whenever 
it comes under the periodic influence of the outward acting 
force — (Fy — Fx) -^ 2. We use the negative sign in con- 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 215 

nection with this outward force in order to distinguish the 
direction from the -(- (Fy — Ft) -^- 2, which we consider 
as being directed toward the origin P. The periodic dis- 
placement of the body through NK against the inward re- 
sistive force -|- (Fy — Fs) -f- 2 is much the same as if the 
body were periodically seized by an external agent and 
dragged through this distance against the resistive force of 
a spring. The path RK may be regarded as a smooth, fric- 
tionless slide or plane surface upon which the body can 
oscillate. Our preliminary investigation will confine the 
body to an oscillatory motion along this slide. 

Let the force required to displace the body a unit dis- 
tance along the vector against the resistive force 
-f (Fy — Fm) -^ 2, regarded as acting toward P, be repre- 
sented by f. The total force F^ necessary to displace the 

body through the distance NK = e is then f e = F^, 
Suppose, now, that the body has been brought to the point K 
by the action of the outward force — (Fy — F.) -^ 2 = F^, 
Upon the cessation of the activity of F^, which we can 
properly assume at this stage of the analysis, the body 
begins its return motion in a direction toward point P. 
When it has moved through a distance i = KM it has arrived 
at any general point M, 

At the point M the available force F ^ is commensurate 
with the remaining distance to N; that is, the distance 
MN = (e — = z. Hence 

If for the body at any general point M we let 

V = velocity, 

a = acceleration, and 

m = the mass then 

i;=-=37, a=j-, and vdv=adi 
at at 

At the point M the available force F,==/(e— i)«:m.a 

and .J-^^. 

m 

Substituting this value of a in v dv — a di^ we have 

V dv '=^- . di 

m 



216 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

Integrating from o to v and from o to i, we obtain 

which gives _ 

An inspection of this last equation reveals the fact that 
v=o when i = o, or when i—Se; consequently the body will 
oscillate between the points K and R. 

When i = e, v has a maximum value given by 

Since v=*t:, dt=»"-, and therefore / dt=- / — • 

where i is the time required for the body to traverse the distance 

f di /i\ 

Now, / ^ arc ver sin i - |. 

y\/2ei-~i^ \e/ 

If in Fig. 21 the circle KHR be described with NK as a 

radius, then in the triangle NMH we have 

. ^ , ^ ( NH-MN) 

ver sm 5 = 1— cos Z = - t^f? ; 

NH ' 

but 

(NH-MN) «(NK-NM)-(e-z)=e-(e-i)=i. 

Therefore, ver sin 3 = -, and it follows that 8 is the arc 

e 

whose ver sin = -. It is also evident that 
e 



/■* /m ip. 

/ dt = V/ T . arc ver Sin - j 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 217 

The motion of the body from point K = o to point R 
over the path KR = 2e corresponds to a variation of the 
angle 6 from 0° to 180°. In circular measure, since the 
radians in 1" = 7t ~ 180**; we have S z= tt, when ^ is 
measured in degrees = 180°. These values correspond to a 
value of i = 2e. From these observations the following re- 
lation should be self-evident: 



jL^^f^t. 



It is seen that in the circle KHR the ordinate drawn 
from any position M of the body moving in the path of KR 
intercepts an arc KH which determines the instantaneous 
value of S, 

The general expression (circular measure) for t, the 
time, is therefore 



-^l"■ 



Investigating the dynamic relations pertaining to the 
moving point M in the rectilinear path KR and the point H 
in the circular path KHR, we find, for the point M moving in 
KR, the following expression for velocity, acceleration, time, 
etc., corresponding to simultaneous positions of H ; 

1. versin B = (l-cos 8) = l-^£i:2\ = i 

2. i = e.ver sin 8 = e(l — cos 8) 

3. t = ,^| 

Since di = dje(l— cos 8)=e.sin 8.d(8), and 

dt = ^5.d (S); 

then, if we substitute these values in the general expression 

y=^rr, we have 
dt 

di e.sin 8.d(8) ff . 
^' ^f.d(« ^"^ 

5. a=/i^^ = ^.e(cos8). 
m m 



218 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

This is evident because (e--i)=e(cos h). 

From Equation 3 we have t=5^|-T, consequently 

and 



6. . d(B) = dt.^£ 



^1 — = angular velocity = ^i. 



7 M 

'• dt 

In Fig. 21 2 = (e— i)=-^^ = €cos B, hence the following: 

8. dz=--e.sin B.d(S). 

9. d2z=-e.cos 5(d8)2=-z.(d5)2; 
but since 

-^— = {1, d(S)=ti..dt, and 

d2z=-z.({x.dt)2, 
hence 

10. g+.'- = o. 

From Equation 7 we observe that // the angular velocity 
is constant. In other words, the rate of increase of ^ is 
uniform, and the point H travels in its circular orbit KHR 
about point AT as a center at a uniform rate. 

Equation 10 may be developed as follows, using point N 
as the origin : 

Let arc KH = h, then in circular measure B = -. 

e 

When the body is at K the time is represented by t^, and 
when it is at any point H in the circular orbit, the time is t; 
hence the time required in the passage from X to iJ is 
(t — *o)- Knowing from the above discussion that v is 
constant, we have 

^ = (t-t y ^^^ h=v(t-to). 

From the figure we see that 

z = e . cos 5 = e . cosf - j = e . cos< -(t — to) >, 
(v . V 

= 6 . cos-" 



•{i-i-4 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 219 

^""^ ...^ 4^) -<i(vt) 

d(S) \e/ e ^ ' V, ... 

'* = ^r= dr = "dt e^^ constant); 

therefore we have by letting 

V=~-.to=-(X.to, 

e 

11. z = e.cosJii.t — ti.tol =e.cos{(i(t — to)) 

= e.cos{;x.t4-v). 
The velocity v, of the body along the rectilinear path KR is 

expressed by ^'^■"H? ^^^ 

_ dz _ d[e.co3{tJLt-{-v|] _ — e.sin{(jLt4-v| .dlpit-t-v} 
^"~dt" dt ~ dt 

but since, d{tji,t+v} =iJi..dt, it follows that 

^o — e.sin{(it+vjti.dt • ( . , > 

12. y, = '-^ — = -e.(A.sin{;xt+v). 

Let a — the acceleration of M along KRy then 

d^z 

13. a = -Tr^= — e.jjL^.cosf^it+v}, and since 

z = e.cos{tJit+v}, by substitution we obtain 

^^- ^=dr^=-^'"' ^^ dP+^"=^- 

This equation is identical with Equation 10. 
Dividing both members of Equation 14 by «, we have 

15. - = — i— ^- = — (x2 (^ negative constant), 
z z 

By using the transformation formula 

cos(a+b)=cos a. cos b—sin a. sin b in 

Equation 11, we obtain 

16. z = e.cos{(it+v} =e[cos iit.cos v — sin pit. sin v]; 
and letting 

T= — e.sin v, and U = -i-e.cos v, 
we can reduce Equation 16 to the general form for simple har- 
monic motion, viz. ; 

17. z = T.sin ^t+U.cos (i.t = e.cos{iit-f v}. 

If p is the period of one complete oscillation =2{KR) and 
corresponding to a value of B==360° = 2x (circular measure) 

we have, since /"^ 

t=B-*ly (see Equation 3), 

2x 2x \T 

t = -T==— , for by Equation 7, (* = J ^• 

\m 



220 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

Moreover, in the above expression c is the amphtude, and since 

+ PL-1 e -er *°' 
the phase _ v 

.^' 

The law expressed by Equation 10 is equally the law of 

electric oscillations if the resistance is neglected. If we let v 

be the electromotive force of the system, measured in volts, 

we have 

d^v 

-TT-j-f li*.v = 0, where {i is a constant. 

Thus far we have investigated the dynamics of the body 
for a motion confined to the rectilinear path KR. We have 
seen that if the motion of the body be defined by the motion 
of H in the circular orbit KHR, then H will describe equal 
arcs in equal time, and the angular velocity of the vector NH 
vsdll be constant. We shall now make the further assump- 
tion that the vector KRP rotates about P as a center, and 
that simultaneously with this motion the body moves with 
a constant angular velocity /x about the origin N as a center. 
At the end of a definite interval of time ti the vector is in 
the position PGiCi. We shall, moreover, consider that the 
path or orbit of the body is at all times controlled by two 
forces, one parallel to the X axis and the other parallel to the 
Y axis. Furthermore, we shall investigate the case in 
which these forces, acting in normal directions to each 
other, have for their resultant a constant magnitude = 

^^^^"•^^^ = 2(NK) = KR = (Fy - FJ . 

The motion of the body is, therefore, confined to the ring 
area RKBA, 

In triangle GiCiDi (Fig. 21) the following relation is 
evident : q^^^ = c;d;'+ D^g;'. 

Let us designate the involved magnitudes as follows: 
/, = force parallel to the X-axis. 
/y = force parallel to the F-axis, 
F = (Fy — Fx) = resultant = a constant. 
We may then write for any position of the vector PK, 
F2 = (fx)^+(fy)^ = (Fy-F,)V 
At any point Di the forces fx and fy may be resolved nor- 
mally and tangentially to the direction of motion. It is evi- 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 221 

dent that if this is done the sum of the squares of these force 
components must equal (fx)^+(fy)^=*F2= a constant. 

In the triangle GiCiDi we have 
CiDi = MCi-MDi = Fy.cos Pi-F,.cos pi = (Fy-FJcos gi, and 
DiGi = DiJ-GiJ = Fy.sin ^i-Fx.sin ^i = (Fy-FJsin ^i. 

But since I>fi^ -\-Cjy^z=:Cfi\=F\ we have 

F2 = (Fy-FJ2.sin* Pi-f(Fy-F,)^cos2 &i; 
therefore 

F2=(Fy~F,)^ 
which is identical with our original assumptions, and it follows 
that the coordinates of point Di, with P as the origin, are 

x = MDi = Fx.cos pi and 

y = DiJ = Fy.sin &i. 
Consequently the locus of points satisfying the condition 
F^ = (f,)^4-(fy)* = a constant and described as shown is a conic. 
This should be evident from the previous developments. 

In Fig. 21 it is evident that as the vector rotates <sCqCi 
of any triangle GiCiDi— <^'KPC^— the vectorial angle. 
Moreover, <^<X.i = <^DiGiCi is measured by one half arc CJ)^, 
and the central angle DjnCi is measured by arc CiDu 
Consequently <J DinCi = 2cCi=Bi. By Equation 7 we know 
that our primary suppositions gave us a constant angular 
velocity for the body actuated by the assumed force factors. 

In other words, , =»a constant, being a consequence of the 

force activities assumed primarily; therefore, the continuity 

of this condition, taken in conjunction with the rotation of the 

vector, means that the sub-vector DiU will describe equal 

arcs in equal times, and the rate of increase of 

2oCi==Si is uniform. 

From this fact we conclude that since 

d(B)=d{2(oC)i , , ,x. , 

-^ ' \ ' =a constant, therefore 
at at 

d(S) also is a constant, which means that if F^ 

dt 

shall equal \ J ■\- J [ = a constant, the angular velocity 

of the vector PCt must also be constant, because to satisfy 
this condition the principal vector PCi must always describe 
the angle 

0Ci = i<DinCi=i(20Ci). 



222 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

The vector PCi, therefore, describes equal angles m equal 
times. The converse may readily be shown to be true ; that 
is, if the vector describes equal angles in equal times the 
locus is a conic. 

An important deduction may be made from the above 
conclusions. Since the area A of the elliptic sector KDiP 
is given by 



A = -7c.PK 






x -4- 180° = radians in 1°, it follows that in circular measure, 
with oCi given in radians, 

A = ^(cc.); 

and since 

2 

is a constant, the area described by the elliptic vector PDi 
depends upon and varies with the circular vectorial angle 
KPCi = oCi. Since these circular vectorial angles are 
described in equal times, it follows that the elliptic vector 
PDi describes equal areas in equal times. This is Kepler's 
law of areal velocities. It has been derived without the 
erroneous Newtonian central mass attraction idea, which 
hypothesis is incapable of showing a physical reason for the 
modification of the orbit from a circular into one of variable 
radial vectors. A single central force cannot produce this 
modification. In assuming the two unequal force factors 
Fy and Fx, we at the outset provide a physical basis for the 
mathematical results which follow. 

We shall present the matter from still another stand- 
point. At the end of the time t^ we shall assume the vector 
PCi to be in the location shown in Fig. 21, with its vectorial 
angle = oCj. We shall further suppose that the moving body 
is actuated by the outward acting forces — Fy and — F,. 
Opposed to these forces are resistive inward-acting forces 
+ Fy and + Fxy parallel respectively to the Y and X axes. 
These forces are constant. The moving body actuated by 
the two force factors is subjected to a simultaneous two- 
directional displacement whose limits are PK and PA, re- 
spectively commensurate with the forces Fy and F,. Under 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 223 

the action of these constant forces the body will be subjected 
simultaneously to an oscillatory displacement parallel to the 
Y and the X axes. The dynamic relations developed for the 
body in the orbit KHR will hold simultaneously for both 
forces because they are constants acting against resistive 
forces. 

Let the body at the end of a period of time tt be found at 
point Di. Then, in respect to Fy, point Di must lie in a line 
CiM parallel to the X — axis. In respect to the force Fxy 
point Di must lie in a line D^J parallel to the Y — axis. 
The time of the quarter oscillation (complete period -f- 4) 
PK is assumed equal to the time of the quarter oscilla- 
tion PA, 

Now, since 



"^ 
where Vy and v^ are the velocities of the body moving in the 

orbits KCiB and RGiA respectively. 

But — = ^ ' ^ , where ^„ and s^ are the 
Vx s^-^t' ^ 

respective orbital arc distances. Consequently, 

arc KCi SyFy 
arc RGi~Sx~Fx' 

This relation is true only when Gi lies upon the vector 
CiP. Therefore the line DiJ parallel to the Y axis must pass 
through point Gj. It follows, therefore, in light of the pre- 
vious disclosures, that D^ is a general point in the conic 
which, in this case, is an ellipse. Moreover, the law of areal 
velocities is a direct consequence of the above relations. 

We have referred to the fact that a complete investiga- 
tion of any material system interacting according to the 
Space-Time Potential necessitates a reference to a three- 
directional system of axes. 

The inclination of the earth's axis to the plane of its 
orbit shows conclusively that a third force factor influences 
the system. Since the obliquity of the ecliptic — ^that is, the 
angle between the plane of the ecliptic and the earth's equa- 
torial plane — is about 23° 27' 8", the angle which the earth's 



224 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

axis makes with the ecliptic is about 66'' 32' 52". This angle 
is practically constant during the earth's elliptical motion in 
the plane of the ecliptic. Since the earth's semi-diameter 
(according to Bessel) is 20,923,597 feet, the distance h along 
a normal to the plane of the ecliptic from the most remote 
point of the earth's equatorial circumference is 8,327,260 
feet. During one complete revolution of the earth about its 
axis this point traverses through a total normal distance 
= ^A in the time 23 hours, 56 minutes, and 4 seconds 
=: 86,164 seconds. For the distance h the time is 21,541 
seconds. This corresponds to an acceleration a = 0.035892 -f 
feet per second squared, along the normal to the ecliptic, 

since a= 7^. It is therefore clear that the obliquity of the 

ecliptic cannot be maintained without the continuous activ- 
ity of a third directional force. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



225 



5^' 



^ 



/ 



:so'''/3 



^ ^ 



rif. 



/6. 



xi3 



Y 



^ 



Z4f. 



/a. 




© 



226 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 









nj^ 


io^ 










\y 




B 

7 


/ 

^ 




A- 


T 








— /Su^V 


\ 


\ ^^ 


•\ 


/ 




V 


/^ 


Ja I Nt-^ 


A 


X 




, , 


:^ 


7/ 1 1 


\^ 




I 


V 


r 




/ 


\ 


\ 


V_ 


— — '^^ 1/ 7 


/ 




\ 












^-- L. 


r 


{ 



10 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



227 




APPENDIX B 

Electrical Relations According to the Dynamics of 
THE Space-Time Potentlu. 

127. The Newtonian Gravitational Relation According to 
Dynamics. 
It is our purpose now to consider the Newtonian expres- 
sion for gravitational attraction in connection with the re- 
quirements of dynamics. 

Consider, then, the forces f and F acting at the two 
points A and C shown in Fig. 22. We use the term "force" 
here in its ordinary physical sense, without entering into the 
consideration of the implications involved. The work done 

in a system when a force f is transported through a dis- 
tance r is given by the expression 



w=/. 



Therefore if the force /"is transported to the point B 

through a distance (s — a;) , the work W^ = /" (s — x). 
In the same way the work W^ performed in translating the 
force F to the point B through a distance x is given by 
W^ — F (a;). Let us also assume that the point B is so re- 
lated to the entire system that Wi — Wt— f {s — x) = 
F {x) . We can regard point B, then, as a neutral point in 
the system. Moreover, we shall suppose that the time t 

required to transport fio the point B is equal to the time t 
necessary to translate F from C to B, We can write the 
expression F {x) = f(s — x) in the following manner: 

/(s) = (F+/)x (1). 

-C 2(s— x) 
The acceleration a of J is therefore, a = — p — (2). 

2x 
and the acceleration 6 of F is, ^ = ty (3). 

228 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 229 

It is evident that the above expressions for acceleration 
assume that fand F start simultaneously from rest. If the 
mass concentration at A is m, and at C, Af , we have 

f= m (a), and F =r M (b) (4) 

Considering the system shown in Fig. 23, we there assume 
Si mass concentration at A equal to the expression — —, 

and similarly at C we locate a mass concentration of the 
same mathematical magnitude. The significance of this 
procedure will be apparent in the succeeding development. 
With these values for the mass concentration we obtain 



/= 



Mm, . , ^ Mm,, . 

-^(a) and F = -^(b). 



Introducing the values for a and h given in Equations 2 and 3 
into these expressions. 

See Fig. 23. 
Substituting these values of f and F in Equation 1, we have 
r, . rMmj2x) , Mmj2(s-x)U 

Simplifying and solving the above expression for j we find, 

Mra'-m <^)- 

Consequently, j =F; a = b, and x = (s — x), and point B 
is the mid-point of the span AC. 

The expression bj — ^1 is of the Newtonian type for two 

masses M and m at a distance s from each other. 

Let us concentrate the mass m at A and M at C in the 
system shown in Fig. 22. Retaining the same values for 
accelerations and distances and proceeding as above, we now 

find for the value fthe expression : 

r_^ (M(x)+m(s-x)| .^^ 

In the above analysis we have used the fundamental 
equations of motion, force, and work, which can be shown 



230 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

to be true by experimental evidence. We do not intend to 
abandon their use for the very reason that they can be 
experimentally verified. Their employment, in conjunction 
with the Newtonian expression, has brought us, however, 
face to face with a serious dilemma. We have derived Equa- 
tion (5), which is in the Newtonian form, by employing 
these very fundamental and experimentally demonstrable 
laws of motion, force and work; nevertheless, the derived 
expression (Equation 5), according to Newton, should have 
been derived from the system shown in Fig. 22. The appli- 
cation of these same fundamental equations to the system 
shown in Fig. 22 gives us a radically different expression for 

f in Equation 6, involving the sum of the masses and the 
distance to the inverse first power. It is seen that Equation 
5, the Newtonian type, can be correctly developed only 
under the assumption that the mass concentration is equal 
to the force divided by the acceleration, which is as it should 
be according to the fundamental laws of motion, force, and 
work. When we apply this relation between mass, accelera- 
tion, and force to the Newtonian system of Fig. 22, we 
derive an expression entirely foreign to the Newtonian 
conception. 

128. The Fundamental Function of Non-Newtonian Dy- 
ncunics. 

Our interest, therefore, must be centered upon the more 
primitive function, the anti-differential of the Newtonian 

-. variation, that is, the expression given by, 

s 

""^^ +i+C (7). 



f~ds 
J «' 



If we desire mechanically to reconstruct the universe, I 
feel certain that this can be most truthfully accomplished 
by thinking of interdependent activity centers as space- 
time projections of dynamic mass. To this space-time pro- 
jection of interacting mass-acceleration kerns I have given 
the name of ''space-time potential." This conception in- 
volves the postulate that every position in the universe has 
a definite potential coefficient and that displacement in the 
Space-Time Projection is commensurate with the magnitude 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 231 

of the equilibrating readjustment involved in this activity. 
This view eliminates the ether as a necessary medium of 
propagation and communication of physical activities. 

For reasons already stated, we abandon the Newtonian 

-, function and proceed to the investigation of its integral, 

s 

the function which we maintain is the true function of 
activity variations in our interacting system made mani- 
fest in the Space-Time Potential. 

Let A and B, Fig. 24, be two activity factors in an inter- 
acting system. Let the known distance between them be d. 
Let the intensity /^ of this specific interaction for the known 
distance d be dependent upon the distance between the two 
activity factors in such a manner that the intensity of inter- 
action / for any variable distance s between the activity 
factors A and B varies inversely with the distance s be- 
tween them. 

Then / will vary as — if there be no other change in the 

' s 

other factors of the system. Consequently, for a known dis- 
tance d, 



-<^> 



where fc is a constant which can be experimeritally determined 

Furthermore, since k = Id{d), it follows that if the constant 

k can be determined for unit factors, we can determine the 

intensity 7« by investigating the expression -. It is evident, 



therefore, that 



■-(9- 



If we, for purposes of analysis, make fc = l in the above 
expression, we obtain 

This equation may be written y=- if we regard the in- 

X 

tensities as ordinates parallel to the Y axis and the distances « 
as abscissas parallel to the X axis in Fig. 25. It is evident that 
this is the expression for an hyperbola. The area between the 

vertical ordinates x = a and a;==I and the h)rperbola j/ = - is 

X 



232 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

given by 

/ 1 

= loge(l)-loge(a)=0.0-logea. 



/: 



x-1 Tx-l 

dx = logeX 



x^a 



As a approaches o, the limit of log^ (a) approaches 
infinity. In other words, a definite finite value for the re- 
quired area does not exist ; that is, 



/: 



x«l 

-dx == — CO 

X 



Consequently the area between x = 1 and x = a, where a 
is not = 0, is given by the expression : 

-loge A 

(the constant of integration has been omitted throughout 
the above) . Similarly, the area between x = 1 and x = b 
is given by : 

ndx»0+loge(b) 
/x=1.0 

The work W done in the displacement of B in the inter- 
acting system of Fig. 24 is given by 

W = / I . ds. Substituting in this expression the value for 
1 8 = Kf - j and integrating, we obtain 

W= /k(i)ds = k.l0geS (8). 



H>' 



Therefore the work done in the displacement of the activity 
factor B from a position s = 1 to a position 5 = 2 is 

B=.2 rs = 2 

w' 



that is, 



W =khoge2-logel[=k.loge<-> = a constant (9). 

In general, wT=°k.logei-l (10). 

It follows that every system existing in dynamic equilib- 
rium involves a constant work factor. Consequently, for 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 233 

any given system, W == F (s) = (Ma) s = a constant. . (11) 
In Equation 11, F, is the force exhibited ; M is the mass ; a 
is the acceleration, and s is the distance. Every activity 
system strives continuously for a realization of this 
condition. 

129. The Change Point. 

If we plot these constants from some suitable point as a 
center, preferably the point which causes log^s to equal 
zero, we obtain a series of concentric semi-circular lines 
each of which pertains to a particular constant. The point 
1, for which log^ Si = o, divides the system into positive 
and negative work zones within which dynamic and static 
equilibrium is established. To this particular point (point 
1) we have given the name change point. The circular lines, 
each defined by a specific constant, may be termed loci of 
eqiial potentials. In Fig. 26 we show the logarithmic curve 
plotted with values of log^ s as ordinates for corresponding 
values of s as abscissas. Fig. 27 also shows a typical Space- 
Time Potential zone system. The data for Figures 26 and 27 
are found in Table 1. 

The element of time has not, up to this point, entered into 
our consideration. If the motor activity factors in the sys- 
tem remain unchanged, we must assume that the magnitude 
of the work effect for one unit of time must be the same 
as for every succeeding unit of time. 

If a system is to continue to exist in the state of dynamic 
equilibrium, the sum of the positive and negative work done 
must be equal to zero. A system rotating about the change 
point 1 would, moreover, continue to rotate unless dis- 
turbed by new influence factors. Furthermore, the path of 
motion would be along loci of equal potential. The positive 
work done about the center of rotation (the change point 
1) would for every interval of time be equal to the negative 
work done. Each succeeding unit of time must develop 
equal amounts of work, 

130. Rotary Systems. 

In a simple rotary system, Fig. 28, consisting of the two 
bodies M and m rotating in dynamic equilibrium about the 



234 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

change point 1, the positive work done in a unit of time by m 
in passing from the position vIq to m^ must be equal to the 
negative work done in a unit of time by M in passing from 
Mo to Ml. Furthermore, the positive work done from 
rrio to m^ must be equal to the positive work in a unit of 
time from m^ to m^. Similarly, work M^ to M^ = work 
Ml to M2, if the time element is the same. 

If the bodies M and m are assumed as constants in the 
system, then their orbits will continue to be concentric 
circles unless a third activity factor be introduced into the 
system. If M and m remain constant and a change from the 
circular orbits is observed, then the cause for this change 
cannot be found within the simple system M — m. More- 
over, a central force does not exist in the universe. Condi- 
tions of dynamic equilibrium exist, but no single factor in 
the system can be regarded as a central force. The time- 
honored notion that the sun, a central force, is located at 
one focus of an ellipse with the earth in the elliptic locus 
is nothing but a convenient mathematical myth. The point 
1 may be found within the limits of the volume M, but it is 
not coincident with the center of mass of M. If the two 
points are practically coincident the continuous neutraliza- 
tion of the distance involved between them must be ascribed 
to other activity factors not depicted in the simple system 
shown in Fig. 28. If we grant that the sun's center of mass 
is located at point 1, that fact alone would not account for 
the deflection of the earth's path from a circular to an ellip- 
tic orbit. A cyclical change in the mass of either M or m (or 
both) would constitute a suiSicient cause for a change in 
the orbits from the circular to the elliptical. However, we 
are not assuming that such a rhythmical mass change 
occurs, consequently the elliptical orbit must be due to influ- 
ences not contained in the arbitrary and simple system 
M — m. 

The sum total S of all the activity factors in the inter- 
acting system known as the universe may be represented by 
the expression, S = R +r, where r is the system M — m, 
and R is all the remaining factors. It is not necessary to 
assume that all of R is directly involved in interaction with 
the system r; but in order to simplify the problem we may 
think of the unequilibrated portion U of R which requires 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 235 

the system r for its equilibrant. It is to the system U, then, 
that we must ascribe any actual modifications from the cir- 
cular orbits which may be observed in the system r. We 
shall assume that the system r will endeavor to maintain its 
own fundamental nature while under the interacting influ- 
ence of U. We believe that such an assumption is more 
rational than the converse, and has the advantage of being in 
line with the reasonable ideas of conservation. In dynamics 
the path of a particle is of secondary importance since an 
infinite number of component paths may produce the same 
resultant. Consequently we feel that we are justified in 
supposing that the basic element of the system is the ele- 
ment of work done, which we have shown is a constant for a 
unit of time. If the converse of this is assumed, it would 
follow that in the equilibrated system r work is created in 
time without a change in U or R. The latter position would 
be difficult, indeed, to substantiate. 

For these reasons we look for deflections and velocity 
changes in the orbit, but we maintain that the system r 
will continue to exhibit its basic characteristic, which is 
the development of equal work areas in equal times. If the 
previously developed equation of an ellipse is considered, 
it will be seen that this conic section satisfies the condition 
that the developed work areas shall be equal for equal inter- 
vals of time. This condition is shown in Fig. 29, where the 
path of m is deflected from the circular path by the influence 
U on the orbit mQin^m^ consistent with the condition that 
the area described by the radius vector shall be constant 
for a unit of time. Thus area (Im^mi) = (area Imimg), 
etc. 

The Newtonian justification of Kepler's equal time-area 
law was based upon the assumption of a central force acting 
from the focus of the conic section with an intensity which 
depended upon the product of the masses and inversely 
upon the square of the distance between them. Finding 
no rational or empirical justification for the Newtonian 
formula and failing to agree with him in regard to the 
efficacy of a single unchanging central force to deflect a 
body into an elliptic orbit, we have made radically different 
assumptions which lead to the same final results as far as 
observed phenomena are concerned. 



236 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

131. Electron Theory According to the Space-Time Potential. 
We shall now show that the Space-Time Potential is 

applicable to atomic and electronic conditions. In order to 
test the applicability of the system outlined above, let us 
attempt the calculation of the so-called electi:ical charge on 
the electron. 

We have already seen that, in our system of Space- 
Time Potential, every case of interaction involves a work 
constant. We have expressed this fact mathematically by 

the relation rTT /lur \ 4. *. 

W = (Ma) s = a, constant. 

Moreover, every activity system vnll so conduct itself in its 
various factor activities that the realization of this work 
constant becomes an accomplished fact unless extraneous 
factors intervene, in which event the law still holds, pro- 
vided that the additional factor be included in the system. 
Gas expansion relations come under the Space-Time 
Potential. If the temperature remains constant during ex- 
pansion we know that pv, = a, constant, where p is the pres- 
sure exerted and v is the volume of the gas. The phe- 
momena of thermodynamics are explainable according to 
the Space-Time Potential. The increase in internal energy 
developed when a system passes from the state 1 to the 
state 2 can be calculated from the Space-Time Potential. 
The work done in compression is merely the reverse prob- 
lem of the case of expansion. In this respect, also, our 
Space-Time Potential is more far-reaching than Newton's 
formula. 

132. Calculation of the Charge Exhibited by an Electron, 
Using the Primary or Hyperbolic Relations of the 
Space-Time Potential. 

If our Space-Time Potential is to pass still further be- 
yond the Newtonian limitations, we must show its applica- 
bility to electrical phenomena. Let us attempt the calcula- 
tion of the electrical charge on an electron by using our 
fundamental relation 

W — (Ma)s = C, a constant 
In order to simplify the analysis, we shall write the ex- 
pression in the form 

MR = C, where R = a.s 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 237 

An operative electrical work system involves a pressure 
constant. The liberation constant of an electron must con- 
sequently involve a decomposition constant D, consequently, 
R — Dr, where D is the decomposition voltage and r is 
the intensity of the current during the time t. Substituting 
this value for R in the expression MR — C, we obtain, 

M(Dr) = C or Mr =-^r= h, (12) 

since D is a constant for any given system. If the intensity 
of the current r is given in amperes and the time t is ex- 
pressed in hours, then our compound unit is the ampere- 
hour. We must also relate the intensity of the current to 
its dissociative effect in the electrolytic cell, since this is the 
very means employed in measuring current intensities. The 
value r, then, for any particular chemical element, becomes 
the number of ampere hours necessary to liberate a unit 
mass, the gram, per unit of chemical valence. Moreover, 
since the liberated masses must be in the same ratio as the 
atomic masses of the chemical elements considered, it fol- 
lows that M may be expressed in terms of the atomic masses. 
The expression Mr = h may be written 

M = h (4) (13) 

In Table II we give the values of M and r for a sufficient 
number of chemical elements to plot the curve shown in 
Fig. 30, where M is plotted as ordinates for the correspond- 
ing values of r as abscissas. The curve in Fig. 30, is an 
hyperbola of identically the same order as the one shown 
in Fig. 25, derived for the Space-Time Potential. Here we 
have arrived at magnitudes of atomic and electronic pro- 
portions, and we still find the function /=k (—j opera- 
tive, while the Newtonian function /=k (-A fails us 

completely. 

By the use of our own function we can derive the value 
of the charge shown by an electron. In order to accom- 
plish this we shall adopt the well-established value of 
1.662x10-=^* gram as the mass H of the hydrogen atom.* 
The remarkable researches of Kaufmann have shown that 



'Robert A. Millikan, The Electron (1917), p. 238. 



238 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

the mass of the electron is not a fixed quantity, but that it 
varies with the velocity, increasing as the velocity increases. 
This is in complete accord with the laws of the Space-Time 
Potential, as will be seen by inspecting Table I and Fig. 
27. Moreover, the Space-Time Potential offers, for the first 
time, an explanation of the very phenomenon brought to 
light by the researches of Kaufmann. Since this variation 
of mass with velocity is known to be a fact, and since the 
values for the mass are practically constant up to a velocity 

of TTithat of light (3.0 X lO^*' centimeters per second in 

air), we shall use in our analysis that value of m for the 
electron which corresponds to a velocity i; = 3.0 x 1^ ^ 
= 0.1 (3.0 X 10^^) , the velocity of light in air. 

For this velocity the mass m of the electron is about 

-^77=- of the mass of the hydrogen atom,^ hence 
lo4o 

1 fif\9v 10-24 

m = ^ • ^g^^ = 9 • 0081 X IQ-'^^ gram (14). 

If D, the liberation potential difference for the electron, 
and e, the charge, are known, then m may also be calculated 
from the expression 

m = -^ (15). 

By using the well-known relations pertaining to electro- 
chemical equivalence we have calculated the quantities set 
forth in Tables II, III, and IV. The relation of these values 
to the curve of constant areas, which is of the utmost signif- 
icance to the development of the Space-Time Potential, is 
evident from an inspection of Fig. 30. We shall now de- 
velop the value of the charge e carried by an electron from 
the Faraday relations and by the use of the data contained 
in the tables referred to above. 

Faraday's first law states that 

uC = j (16). 

where u — b. constant depending only upon the kind 

of the substance, 

C = the current passing through the electrolyte, 
m = the amount of the liberated mass, and 
t — the time of duration of the current C. 
•Robert A. Millikan, The Electron (1917), P- 184. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 239 

The value u is called the electrochemical equivalent, and 
in Table II the values of u are given for the different ele- 
ments, with m in grams, t in seconds, and C in amperes. 

Since 1 ampere-hour = 3600 coulombs, where 1 coulomb 

= 1 ampere in 1 second, it follows that u = n^r^r.-n gram, 

OOOiJIX 

where R is in ampere-hours per gram per unit valence. 
This is evident because 3600R coulombs are required to lib- 
erate 1 gram of the given substance. The function ^ there- 
fore becomes the fundamental relation from which our 
analysis begins. That this function is our original Space- 
Time Potential function associated with proper constants 
is evident when we consider the motion of the liberated ion 
in the electrolyte as being a case of genuine motion in a 
work system which must operate in accordance with the 
fundamental laws of the Space-Time Potential. 
The values u and M are related by the expression 

"|,=k, a constant=0. 00001044 (17) 

that is, M = hM= grams per coulomb ; hence, if we use „ as the 

lo4o 

atomic mass of the electron, we have 

u = 0.00001 044 X-j-^jc" grams per coulomb for the electron. 

If m' is the grams liberated by 1 electrostatic unit (C.G.S.), 

ti' = r-— rr- because 1 coulomb =3x10* C.G.S. 
oXlU 

electrostatic units, and the valence v = l (18). 

Therefore, 

, u 0.00001044 , oociv^in «« 

^ =3X10-*= 1S45X3X10» ='^-^^^^^^Q ^^'^' 
If N — number of electrons liberated by 1 C.G.S. electrostatic unit, 

m = the actual mass of the electron in grams = 9.0081 X 

10"^^ gram, we have 

u' 
N =—= number of electrons liberated by 1 C.G.S. 
m 

electrostatic unit (19). 

1. 8861X10-" 



N = 



9.0081x10-28 
= 2,093,800,000 = 2 . 0938 X 10+» electrons. 



240 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

If e is the electric charge on each of the A^ electrons, it follows that 

Ne = l C.G.S. electrostatic unit (20), 

because one such unit of electricity is required to liberate the N 

electrons. 

Therefore, 

^-H= 2.0938X10+ ' = ^-^^SX^»-'°^-Q-S- 
electrostatic unit (21). 

Let us attack the problem from another viewpoint, which will 

introduce new and interesting constants. 

By referring to Table III, we see that u' = k'M and therefore 
k-^n:^! 8861x10-^3^3 ^3^^^_, ^^^^^ 

"1845 
The value fc' is a constant and could have been derived from any 
of the given elements by taking the corresponding values of u' 
and M. 

If M is the atomic mass and m is the actual value in grams of 
a given element, then the constant ratio is given by 
1 

^ = ^ = 9.QQ8\x'lO--3 =^'Q^^^><^Q^" Avogardro^s 

Constant (H = 1 . 0) (23) . 

u' 

Now, since N = — and u' = k'M (24) 

' m 

by substitution we obtain 

N = — but — =1; therefore (25). 

mm' ^ ' 

N = k'l = 3. 480X10-1^X6. 0168X10 + 23=2. 0938X10+"... (26). 

per each C.G.S electrostatic unit. Since k' and V are both 

constants, it follows that iV is a constant. 

Since Ne = 1 and N = k'l, it follows that 

e= ^ =4.775X10-10 C.G.S. electrostatic units (27). 

As before, we reason that e must be a constant since both fc' 
and I are constants. 

These facts can therefore be expressed as general laws : 

1. The number of ions, whether gaseous or liquid, lib- 
erated by a given quantity of electricity is a constant in- 
dependent of the kind and mass of the ion. 

2. The charge carried by a free ion, whether gaseous 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 241 

or liquid, is a constant quantity independent of the kind and 
mass of the ion. 

The following values of e, derived experimentally, show 
that our own value derived from the application of our 
Space-Time Potential is concordant with experimental 
facts : 

H. A. Wilson e = 3.1x10-^' C.G.S. electrostatic unit 

J. J. Thomson e = 3.4x10"'^ C.G.S. electrostatic unit 

E. Rutherford e = 4.65x10-^' C.G.S. electrostatic unit 

R. A. Millikan. . . . e = 4.774 ± 0.005 xlO-^" C. G. S. elec- 
trostatic unit 

The discrepancies in the above experimental value of e 
are due to the differences in the experimental methods em- 
ployed, and also to the variations in the analytical assump- 
tions. The Millikan value of e is probably correct within the 
limits given.^ 

The data given in Table III can be used to calculate the 
masses of the various ions. Knowing R, the C.G.S. elec- 
trostatic units per unit of valence necessary to liberate one 
gram of an ion, the mass m of an ion may be found from the 
relations given in Tables III and IV : 

^, _ (1.08X10^^) R .^ ^^ 
V ' r' 

In the above relation it is assumed that e is a constant 
representing the charge associated with the mass m of a 
given ion at the moment of liberation. 

The fundamental electrical relations involved in Tables 
II, III, and IV are shown as a hyperbolic curve in Fig. 30. 
This curve is of the same order as the curve depicted in Fig. 
25, which constitutes the primary or fundamental curve of 
the Space-Time Potential. The secondary work curves, simi- 
lar to Fig. 26, may readily be derived from the correspond- 
ing primary hyperbolas. It is therefore evident that we 
have dealt, in the above analysis, with relations which in- 
here in the fundamental function of the Space-Time Poten- 
tial. Since mr' = e, a constant, it follows that the electrical 
relations are of the same order as the volume-pressure rela- 
tion which pertains to gases. In other words, the masses of 



'Robert A. Millikan, The Electron (1917), p. 119. 



242 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

the ions are related to the electrical charges in the same 
manner as the volume of a gas is related to the applied 
pressures. 

We shall now calculate the charge carried by an electron 
from the secondary relations which inhere in the Space- 
Time Potential. By secondary relations we mean those re- 
lations which may be evolved from the analysis of the work 
curve. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



243 



f.m.a /7y.£a ^"^'^ -*" 



, , fr(x):zf(e-x)'3 J(3)=(r^/)x.§^^£^^&^^if^\ 



(S'X) 



C 



-*i*- 






en fefm. 



{Mfn\[pJ^:x)\ -^' ' (Mm] UCx)] 



(S-X) 



— ^^ 



^- oo 



:u-^: — >i 



^. 



<^ cr 



^-i 




Curoe 0/ Cons /a/? i/Jreas ^ T/je Hy perhola /s .<S^f. 



® 



244 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 




13 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



245 



K 



H 



3 

5^ 



lerz-f-^M 



fHy-f-'M 



lorP^ 



999'/-f-=A 



f/fO-f-'Af 






f //S'0-=/*t 



9/s'0-=/n 



609'/'^M 



Cf>''/i 



'•uj6k 



^jot^O 



^Q^-Z+'A ^ 



^lO'^-f^/n 



WP^ 






■^1 



8v 

'I 

I 

I 



ftf/*'/i 






svrih'A 



ls^'0-"'M V) 



u 



-sfii 



£Gro-'/n 



•i'O^'/^ 'At 



U9^ 

II 



^u 



COC'd-'^ 



14 



246 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 




SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



247 



Moduli -r' 



0.0000 



/.d9S66x/0 



M- Z05.55 



M860exW 



M=/93.:5 



2.6836X/0' 



M=/07./Z 



4.5554^>^I0 



ni=t.7767x/0'"- 



M=6:5J 



S.l7J04KtO' 



m=/.0479x/0'*^ 
M* SS.S 



Z^OJfAAf' 






lZJ5€Z56AKr 







m=;i,QC<iCxHr^ 



^)na. 



/8.09618X/0 



M-/S.66 



Z0M58xM) 



M' 1^.95 



Oa 



ZfJ9506fifO 



M= 11.91 



fn^L97^UiO'^ 






2fi72W56;clO' 



M^/.OOO 



rn:U6Z*J0'^* 



O//. 



5.zm6xfo' 






m^SiOOdtxtO'** 



i)E. 



Ft q. 30. 
Cor ye of Consfanf Areas, 
7">»e Hyperhofa, M^ 5*^^ Q£ 



mr =-€, 



248 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



T/^BLE'I. 




Col. 1. 


Col. Z. 


Coi.J. 


Co 1. 4. 


Col.S. 


CcC. 6. 


Coi.7. 




I* oca it on ■* 
Point, t 

n 


Distance 
'<» CAanae 

Point. 


WorMDone. 

'Mil 


h^orkDone. 

€41 


CoIZtUZ 
rorce 


n 

T^atio. 

Z>istQnce, 

yflocity. 

y^cce/fralivi 

/Tirce. 


liny 


1 

A 

n 


0.00 


/.CO 


— oO 




CO 
















" 








* 0.000056 I49Z ^ 


, omism 


-9.7675 




9.76005 




It 

II 
•1 




5J7,l85,0O0.{mrf 


\ O.OOOZ.0596 


^ o.wmo'^ 


-6.'987S 




6.^6955 






l\^7Z,n^h\ 


0.01 


1 0.99 


-4.605 




4.65 






/0,000m^ 


O.05 ^ 


0.95 


-Z.996 




3./5 






400mto 


CIO ^ 


0.90 


■■Z.303 


> 0.694 
y 0.405 

yo.Z88 
yo.zzs 
yo./8z 
yo./54 
yo./34 
yo.//d 
\o.fos 


Z.56 








o.zo I 


C 0.60 


-/. 609 


z.o/ 






/Sm. 


O.Z>0 - 


0.70 


-/.Z04 


/.7Z 








0.^ , 


, d.60 


-0.3/6 


/.53 






6.Z5mi.s 


0.50 


' 0.50 


-0.693 


/.38S 






4.oomz.o 


0.60 . 


- o.^o 


-o.s// 


/.Z77 






Z.769mi.hi 


0.70 


I 0.30 


-0.3S7 


/./9 






z.o^smiAi 


0.80 . 


' O.ZO 


■■0.ZZ3 


/.// 






/.SGZWi.zs 


0.90 


o./o 


'0»/0S 


/.05 






/.zizmi.ii 


-1 














mUjMiJMTEsEM mm 1 II riBi«l*W»>IM 






mi.,0 


roini.j^ 






^0.105 
Y0.69Z 

\ 0.40b 
~^0.ZS7 

yo.zzz 

>0./65 
>0./S4 

yo./53 

>C.//6 
>O./06 

> 0.693 

> 0.405 
>O.Z66 








d.lli 


O.ll 


+ 0./05 


0.945 


/.// 


mi. II 


I.ZS 


0.Z5 


-hO.ZZ3' 


0.69Z 


L25 


/?7f.zs 


/.^z 


O.^d 


•1-0.357 


0.850 


%43 


/n/.t3 


/.67 


0.67 


-hO.5// 


0.76Z 


/.67 


m/.6i 


z.oo 


/.OO 


■t 0.693 


0.693 


Z.OO 


/JJ Z.eo 


JB.5C 


/.SO 


+0. 9/6 


0.6/0 


Z.50 


m».5o 


J. 00 


z.oo 


-h/.099 


0.549 


3.00 


mz.eo 


S.^3 


Z.33 


-h/.^O^- 


0.5/6 


3.33 


/??3.i3 


^.00 


3.00 


H.366 


0.46Z 


4.00 


7/2 .,.00 


S.OO 


4:00 


•h/.609 


0.40Z 


S.OO 


77/ s.ec 


6.00 


.^.00 


•/■/.79^ 


0.3584 


6.00 


771 6.00 


7.00 


6.00 


■/■/.^^S 


0.324 


7.00 


/7? 7.00 


e.oo - 


:. 7.00 


■h^.079 


0.Z91 


e.oo 


/n e.oo 


3.00 ^ 


^ e.oo 


■h&.fh 


O.Z74 


3.00 


77/9.00 


/o.oo 


1 s.oo 


i'Z.303 


0.Z56 


/o.oo 


77/ 10.00 


eo.oo »* 


t /3.00 


i-Z.996 


0./57S 


zo.oo 


7/2 io.ee 


. zs.oo ^ 


- Z4.00 


-h3.Z/9 


0./34/ 


zs.oo 


771 2s.»o 


5-0.00 


1 ^9.00 


i-3.9/Z 


0.0798 


so. 00 


772 Se.e 


75.00 r 


. 74.00 


■t 4.3/7 


0.0563 


75.00 


772 754 


/oo.oo 


^ 99.00 


i-4.605 


0.0465 


/OO. 00 


772/00.0 
















4 ^855. ZO 


'<^85nO 


+8.4878 




0.00174654 


46S5.Z0 


/n + 


* /7 6 0^.70 


11608.10 


i'9.7S7S 




tJim^^i 


17609.10 


7n\ 






























T^ 


n-i. 


h/ 




U/Un-1). 


n 


771 n. 


:■ 










































■/-co 


■tco 


-hoo 




o 






















% 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



249 



n 

0. (JOOOO 



0.90 



TABLE -I^ CONTiriUED, 



4 



T/ie^d£rocesm. Tiefion 



0/ '^^"'fBriil!^'' 



— CO 



-O./OS 



0.99SS80/ 



0.39999567 



0.9999999907/5 



0.m999993S09 



N 



It ^ 



ChoTfoe Paint. 



/.mmm/0/ 



¥\ 



lM000m9Z87 



I.OOOOOiSS 









-,. V 



r ^'1 ^f ! 



I—- 



I ■ 






Tk/iicncevn. 



^/.Sdx/0 



-s 



-^.9Sx/0' 



\ 



'^ / '^ / 



^?i 



,.,.<i 



...i-rr :^' 



/ 0000/38 



<• 



T/ie /ficrocosm. 



/ 



//// 






\ 



•I 

Si 









'9M/^S^/0- 



4./87SX/0'' 



''3.0937Sx/0'^ 
0.0 000 



1. 



f3.09iT5M'' 



+6.mS;(/0' 



II 

I" 



^^A- 



-fS.WZSx/0'^ 



H^S^/O' 



H98X/0 



-s 



% 



-/-ojos 



The 



/iacrccosm. 



Tfe qlan f/ 



l//ic^ua/ Tfaa^ii 



n. 



OrSits, 



T/te A/icrccosm . 



250 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 
TABLE II 



Elements. 


1 
1 


V. 

i 

1 


M. 

O OQ 


U. 

U = 3600R = ^M- 
Electrochemical 

Equivalents 

per Unit Valence 

Grams per 

Coulomb. 


R. 

Ampere 

= Hours 
per Gram 
per Unit 
Valence. 


M. 

Chemi- 
cally 

Equiv- 
alent 

Atomic 

Masses. 


h. 

h-MiR. 

Hydrogen 
Constant. 


Electron 


E 


1 


1 

1845 


0.00000000566095 


49069.06 


1 
1845 


26.5957 


Hydrogen 


H 


1 


1.000 


0.00001044 


26.5957 


1.000 


26.5957 


Carbon 


G 


4 


11.91 


0.0000310 


8.9606 


2.977 


26.5957 


Nitrogefti 


N 


3 


13.93 


0.0000484 


5.7405 


4.643 


26.5957 


Oxygen 





2 


15.88 


0.0000829 


3.3512 


7.940 


26.5957 


Sodium 


Na 


1 


22.88 


0.0002388 


1.1632 


22.88 


26.5957 


Potassium 


K 


1 


38.86 


0.0004052 


0.6855 


38.86 


26.5957 


Iron 


Fe 


t 


55.5 


0.0002902 


0.9576 


27.75 


26.5957 


Copper 


Cu 


1 


63.1 


0.0006586 


0.4218 


63.10 


29.5957 


Silver 


Ag 


1 


107.12 


0.0011180 


0.2485 


107.12 


26.5957 


Platinum 


Pt 


2 


193.3 


0.0010094 


0.2752 


96.65 


26.5957 


Lead 


Pb 


2 


205.35 


0.0010718 


0.2592 


102.675 


26.5957 



Important Relations 
^= oonrvp gram. K=vj-=0.00001044=UforHydrogen=Constant 



R= 



M, 



UR =0.000278= 



3600 
h=M,R=26.5957 



= Constant. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

TABLE III 
Atomic Mass Moduli in CG.S, Electrostatic Units 



251 



Elements. 


V 

CO 

a 

■f 

> 


M 
Atomic 
Masses. 


u' Moduli 

, vU 
"* (3X109) 

Atomic Mass 

Moduli t*' 
In C.G.S. Units 
(Electrostatic). 


R 

Ampere -= 

Hours 
per Gram 
per Unit 
Valence. 


f' Moduli 
^, (1.08X10") i2 

V 

Atomic Mass 

Moduli r'. 
in C.G.S. Units 
(Electrostatic). 


Electron 


1 


1 
1845 


1.886X10-^8 


49069.06 


5.29946X10" 


Hydrogen 


1 


1.000 


3. 48X10-" 


26.5957 


287.23356X10" 


Carbon 


4 


11.91 


41.33X10—" 


8.9606 


24.19308X10" 


Nitrogen 


3 


13.93 


48.40X10—" 


5.7405 


20.6658X10" 


Oxygen 


2 


15.88 


55.26X10-" 


3.3512 


18.09648X10" 


Sodium 


1 


22.88 


79.60X10-" 


1.1632 


12.56256X10" 


Potassium 


1 


38.86 


135.06X10-" 


0.6855 


7.4034X10" 


Iron 


2 


65.5 


193.46X10-" 


0.9576 


6.17104X10" 


Copper 


1 


63.1 


219.53X10-" 


0.4218 


4.65544X10" 


Silver 


1 


107.12 


372.66X10-" 


0.2485 


2.6838X10" 


Platinum 


2 


193.3 


672.93X10-" 


0.2752 


1.48608X10" 


Lead 


2 


205.35 


714.53X10-" 


0.2592 


1.39968X10" 



252 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 
TABLE IV 



The Masses of Atoms Developed from the Charge e and 

the Moduli r. Electrophysical Constants 



Elements. 


M. 

Atomic 

Masses. 


m 
e 

Masses of Atoms. 
(Gram). 


Constants. 


Electron 


1 

1845 


9.0081X10—" 


1— Coulomb =3 X10» C.G.S 

Electrostatic Units. 
1 — Ampere Hour = 

3600 Coulombs. 
1— Ampere Hour =3600 

(3X109) = 1.08X10" 
(C.G.S. Electrostatic Units). 


Hydrogen 


1.000 


1. 662X10-" 


Constants.^ 

e, -,N\ k', N, and h. 
m 

Electron Charge, c = 4 . 7738 

XIO— '«=mr'. 

(Electrostatic Units). 

e = l. 59127X10-'^° 

(Electromagnetic Units). 

— = 1.7664X10' 
m 

(Electromagnetic Units). 
=5.2994X10^^ 

(Electrostatic Units). 
Avogadro's Constant, 

N'=6. 0679X10". 

N = Number of Electrons 
Liberated by 1 -C.G.S. 
Electrostatic Unit. 

Ar=A;7=-=2. 0938X10* 
m 
;i = M, 72=26.5957 


Carbon 


11.91 


1. 9731X10-" 


Nitrogen 


13.93 


2. 3100X10-" 


Oxygen 


15.88 


2.6379X10—" 


Sodium 


22.88 


3. 8000X10-" 


Potassium 


38.86 


6. 4452X10-" 


Iron 


55.5 


9. 2318X10-" 


Copper 


63.1 


1. 0479X10-" 


Silver 


107.12 


1.7787X10—" 


Platinum 


193.3 


3. 2123X10-" 


Lead 


205.35 


3. 4106X10-" 



^ These constants were developed by the writer from data given in this 
work. 



APPENDIX C 

Calculations involving Hyperbolic Logarithms 

133. Fundamental Relations and Typical Computations In- 
volving Hyperbolic Logarithms. 

The reader who is familiar with mathematical analysis 
will find nothing new in the following discussion on hyper- 
bolic logarithms. This appendix is intended to assist those 
readers who are less familiar with mathematical manipula- 
tions in deriving for themselves the hyperbolic relations 
which constitute the physico-mathematical foundations of 
the Space-Time Potential. 

Logarithms calculated to the base e = 2.7182818285+ 
are known as Napierian, natural, or hyperbolic logarithms, 
in contradistinction to logarithms calculated to the base 10, 
which are called common logarithms. We will use the term 
hyperbolic logarithm in this discussion in preference to 
natural or Napierian, because the fundamental curve per- 
taining to our system is an hyperbola. 

Let N be any given number. Then the logarithm of N 
to the base C is written log^N and the logarithm of N to 
the base e is written log^ N. 

The following fundamental equations hold good : 

logcN° = n.logeN (28). 

If N = Cy, then y = logcN (29). 

Using any other base as e, we have 

logeN = loge(C^) =y.logeC (30). 

because N = C^. Now since y = logcN, we have 

l0geN = l0gcN(l0geC) (31). 

Now, if N = e, and knowing that logNN = 1, Equation 31 becomes 
log^N = logcN(logNC) , which gives 

l=logeN(logKC), or log^C=j^ (32). 

From Equation 31 it follows that 

logcN _ 1 . . 

logeN-logeC ^^^^• 

253 



254 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

But from Equation 32, z jp^=logce, and, therefore, 

S = ^<'«- •'"• (34) 

Now, if C be the base 10. of the common or Briggs logarithms, 
and e be the base 2 . 7182818+ of the hyperbolic system, Equation 
34 becomes 

&•««- (35). 

Consequently, logioN = logioe(logeN) (36), 

-'^''^^•^=S ^''^- 

From Equation 32 we have the following relations: 

logioe=:^ -7: and logelO = ^ (38), 

logelO ^* logioe 

Therefore Equation 37 may be given the form 

logeN = logioN(logelO) (39). 

Let M = logioe = logio(2. 7182818) =0.4342945 (40). 

^-i-Td^e=''^^''-0A^5-^'^^^^^^ (^1)- 

Then Equation 36 becomes 

logioN = M(logeN) =0.4342945(logeN) (42). 

and Equation 37 takes the form 

log,N=^(log,„N) = ^^gL_(log.„N) (43). 

But since z-r = z = 2.3025851, we have for Equation 43, 

logeN = 2(logioN) =2. 3025851 (logioN) (44). 

Equations 42, 43, and 44 constitute our transformation equations 
In the above the value 3f is known as the modulus of common 
logarithms. 

The reciprocal ^ of any number N is of importance in the 
Space-Time Potential. The reciprocal ;j^ is generally given as 
a decimal fraction. 

The following relation is evident: 

loge(^) = logel-logeN = 0.0-log.N= -iog.N (45). 

Therefore, 
loge(^)= -logeN= -z(logioN)x= -2.3025851(logioN). . . .(46). 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 255 

In order to find the hyperbolic logarithm of a decimal fraction, 

place it=:j^, solve for iV, and substitute the value of N thus 

obtained in the expression 2. 3025851 (logioN) of Equation 46. 

In Table I, col. 1, we find the value 0.0000561492. In 
order to illustrate the procedure, we will calculate the hyperbolic 
logarithm of this decimal fraction. 

Let 1 = 0.0000561492. then iV= ^.0000561492 -''^'^■'' 

From Equation 46, logef ^r^ )= -logeN= -loge(17809.7) 



But loge 17809.7 = 2. 3025851 (logiol7809. 7), and since 
logio 17809.7 = 4.2506574, it follows that 

loge 17809.7 = 2.3025851 (4.2506574). Performing this multi- 
plication by common logarithms, we have 

logio2 . 3025851 = . 3622157 

logio4 . 2506574 = 0.6284561 
log (logel7809 . 7) = . 9906718 
The number corresponding to the common logarithm . 9906718 
is = 9. 7875, 
which therefore = logel7809.7. 

Since logef^r )= — logeN, it follows that 

-9 . 7875 =loge(i) = logejTg^ " ^""^^^^ ' ^000561492). 

In order that every phase of these transformations may be under- 
stood we give the following illustrative examples. 

Given the hyperbolic logarithm —2.99573, required the 
corresponding number. 

Using Equation 42, logioN = M(logeN), we have, since 

-2.99573 = logef 4)- -logeN, 



logioN = . 4342945(logeN) 

= 0.4342945 (2.99573); performing this multiplication 
by common logarithms, we have 

logioO . 4342945 = 9 . 6377843 - 10 

logio2. 99573 = 0.4765030 

logGogioN) =0.1142873 
The number corresponding to the common logarithm 0.1142873 
is 1.3010300 = logioN. Therefore N, the reciprocal of the 
required number, is = 20. 



256 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 



loge(^), 



But -2.99573=loffe(^), therefore i = ^ = 0.05 



Given the decimal fraction . 4, we find the hyperboUc logarithm. 
Let ^ = 0.4, then N=Tr-j = 2.5, as before, 

loge2 .5 = 2. 3025851 (logio2 . 5) ; 
but logio2. 5 = 0.3979400, consequently loge2.5 = 2.3025851 
(0.3979400), and using common logarithms for the multipUca- 
tion, we have 

logio2 . 3025851 = . 3622157 

logioO . 3979400 = 9.5998176-10 

log(log e2 . 5) = 9 . 9620333 - 10 
The number corresponding to the common logarithm 
9.9620333-10 is 0.91629, which therefore = loge2.5 

Since Ioge(-T^j= — log^iV, we have 

-0.91629 = loge(i) = loge(2^) = loge(0.4). 

The above examples should suffice to make clear the method 
by which points and loci in the Space-Time Potential are cal- 
culated. 



APPENDIX D 

The Secondary Function of the Space-Time Potential, 
AND THE Electrical Charge e 

134. Calculation of the Charge exhibited by an Electron, 
Using the Secondary or Logarithmic Relations of the 
Work Curve. 

We shall now proceed with the direct attack of the prob- 
lem before us. We shall make use, in this attack, of no 
other than the well-established laws of dynamics, and in 
particular that portion of dynamics which deals with uni- 
formly accelerated motion where no initial velocity is in- 
volved. In other words, we assume that the systems which 
we consider are responsive parts of an all-inclusive unitary 
organism whose activities in all its parts are describable in 
terms of the Space-Time Potential. 

In this and many other respects we differ from classical 
science, which heretofore has had no single relation capable 
of expressing all phenomenal activities. The Space-Time 
Potential provides us with this single relation, which in- 
cludes gravitation, electricity, thermodynamics, dynamics, 
and statics as mere categories of cosmic interaction evolving 
in accordance with its simple and universally applicable 
laws. 

We shall have occasion to use the following relations of 
dynamics pertaining to uniformly accelerated motion for 
no initial velocity ; 

v = at = ^= V2as (47). 

vt v^ at^ . . 

^=2=2-a = T_; (^^)- 

t = X = ?? = ./?? (50). 

a V Y a 

257 



258 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

In the foregoing expressions: 
V = the velocity, 
a =: the acceleration, 
s = the distance, and 
t = the time. 

We assume that the general expression (i^mv^) repre- 
sents correctly the energy of any material system whose 
mass is m and velocity v. Consequently, if we let 

e — the charge (C.G.S. electrostatic units), 

D = the potential difference (C.G.S. electrostatic 
units) of liberation, 

m r= the mass in grams, 

V = the velocity in centimeters per second, 

a = the acceleration, 

E = the energy of the system, 

s = the spatial displacement for the work W, 

W = the work done by or upon the system during the 
displacement, 

N = number o£ electrons liberated by a current of 
1-C.G.S. electrostatic unit at a difference of potential D 
(C.G.S. electrostatic units), 
then 



E r:^ W 



:fF.da= i/gmv^ = e.D (51) 

Experimental evidence shows that the ratio — is inde- 

m 

pendent of the difference of potential. Consequently, for 
the limits within which m is practically constant the magni- 
tude of the ultimate value of D required to liberate an elec- 
tron from an atomic structure is a function of K, the num- 
ber of electrons constituting the particular atom. This will 
be true universally if future research shall show that the 
charge e is always a constant relative ratio like the velocity 
of light. The evidence of modern research is overwhelm- 
ingly in favor of this assumption. If this be true, then the 
two fundamental relativity ratio constants of the physical 
universe are, first, the velocity of light V, and, second, the 
electric charge e associated with the electron. We may 
unify these two fundamentals into the single relation: 
eV =z constant, thus relating the charge carried by an 
electron to the velocity of light. 

The ultimate value of D, the liberation difference of 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 259 

potential for the electron, may be calculated from Equation 
14 if we assume the constancy of the known relativity ratio 
e. Any attempt to deny the correctness of this procedure 
involves the repudiation of the correctness of Expression 
51, above. We maintain that if the expression holds for the 
macrocosm, it must hold for its constituent miscrocosmic 
groups. 

From our relativity standpoint of the Space-Time Poten- 
tial the electric charge e is well defined by the expression 

^ (ma)s ^E^W 
^~ D ~D~D' 
indicating the complete relativity of the value e* As (ma) s 
approaches an infinite value, D also approaches an infinite 
magnitude. From the viewpoint of the Space-Time Poten- 
tial, the relativity ratio e remains a constant throughout 
the variation of E and D, 

The fact that the experimental difference of potential D 
required to liberate the electron varies is due to the varia- 
tions in the conditions which pertain to the experiment and 
in the atomic aggregates used. This experimental varia- 
tion of D is equally often noted for liquid and gaseous ions, 
but this fact effects neither the value of the relativity ratio 
e nor the liberation constant D which pertains to the elec- 
tronic particle. 

Consequently we are justified in using Expression 51 
for the calculation of the value D. In the preceding we have 
found that e = 4.775x10-^^ C.G.S. units, and m = 
9.0081x10— "" gram. This value of m corresponds to a value 
of V = 3.0x10^ centimeters per second. Transforming 
Equation 51 and substituting the above values, we have 

0.5mv^ ^ 0.5(9.008lXl0-^«)(3.0XW) _g ^g^g 
e 4.775x10-10 

where D = 8.4878 is in the C.G.S. electrostatic system of 
units. 

We purpose to develop the charge e by a direct use of 
the Space-Time Potential in order to show its applicability 
to the investigation of electrical phenomena. We will make 
use of Equation 51, substituting therein the now known 
values of D and m. Consequently we have 

eD = e (8.4878) = (ma) s (52). 



260 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

From Equations 20 and 21, we have 

eN = l and e = ^; 
substituting this value of e in Equation 51, we have 
=^(D) = (ma)s, which gives 

N = -^- = ^^I^ ' (53) 

(ma)s (9.008lXlO-28)as ^^^^* 

Since D = N(ma)s, it follows that D is that difference 
of potential which is required to displace N electrons show- 
ing a charge e and having a mass m through a distance s. 
Furthermore, the N liberated electrons complete their 
migration over the distance s in a unit of time, i,e,, one sec- 
ond. This does not mean that the translation of one single 
electron through the distance s will require a unit of time ; 
in fact it will be shown that t, the time of migration of one 
electron, is equal to 0.0000032361 second. Be it remembered 
that the value of m in Equation 53 refers to one electron. 
Before we can solve Equation 53, we must evaluate the 
acceleration a and the distance s. We shall employ the 
Space-Time Potential for this evaluation. 

Let us place the value D, the difference of potential, = 
8.4878, directly in the Space-Time Potential as exhibited in 
Table I, Appendix B. This means that we regard D = 
8.4878 as an hyperbolic logarithm. If n be the number 
corresponding to the hyperbolic logarithm 8.4878, we have 
logio n ==M (logg n) ; and since loge n = 8.4878, we have 
logio n = 0.4342945 (8.4878) 

=z 3.686,2068, for which logarithm 
n = 4855.2, which value is found in Table I. 

Since s = (n — 1) , v^e have 

s = 4855.2 — 1.0 = 4854.2 centimeters. 

If t is the time required by one electron to migrate the dis- 
tance s, we have from Equation 50, 

^ ^ 2s ^ 2 X 4854 . 2 ^ ^ 00Q0032361 second (54). 

The value t; = 3x 10® c. is the velocity of the electron 
as used previously. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 261 

From Equation 48 we have 

r3:2lra^=9-2^o3xio" (^^) 

Substituting these values of a and s and using m as 
9.0081x10-2' in Equation 53, we obtain 

D ^ 8.4878 

(ma)s (9.0081X10-'')(9.2703X101^)(4854.2)""^ ^* 
N = 2.0938xl0^ which is identical with the value of N 
previously obtained (see Equation 19). 

Consequently it follows that since 

e = ^, e = 4.775x10-'^ C.G.S. electrostatic unit, which 

agrees with the previously calculated value of e, as it must, 
by virtue of the fact that the value obtained for N by the 
two different methods is identical. Consequently we have 
shown conclusively that the Space-Time Potential is capable 
of deriving directly the value e. 

J35. Fundamental Physico-mathematical Relations of the 
Space-Time Potential 

The fundamental relations which inhere in the nature of 
the Space-Time Potential will now be considered. 

Let 

TFn=work done from point n to change point 1, 

W,i =work done from point - to change point 1, 

it 

/n=time of translation through distance Sn, 

t^ =time of translation through distance s^^ 

n = number whose hyperbolic logarithm is Tr„, 

Wn = W* ; t.=t^ (57). 



s.=(n-l); s* = (l-y = ^V" (^^)- 

!B = ^=n (59). 

n 
2su 

Xb = ^ =!s =n (60). 

vi 2s4 Si 

t* 



m 
m 



262 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

Equation 60 is evidently true because tn = ti. 

2Sn 
a_n ^(tn)!^Sn ^^ ^^^^^ 

Sijs 2s i Si 

(tA)^ 
Wn=(mnan)Sn; Wi = (m4ai)si (62). 

Wi^.^^ mA(ajtSjt) .^^^ 

Wn ^ mn(anSn) 

s;=fe)fe)=^'')('^)=''' ^«^)- 

mi = n-(mn); mn = — j (65). 

For values of w < 1.11— (point /) and for values of — > 

y n 

0.90 (point -j), see Table I, continued. 

The following facts and relations are noteworthy : 

Sa-s* (66). 

Wn = W4; tn = tA; Sn=(n-1); Si = ^^^. . . .(57 and 58). 

From Equation 66 we have 

— = n' = l. Equations 60 to 65, inclusive, take the form: 

Vn^^an __mn _ mnan_^^ C67) 

vi ai mi m^ai 

feX?J(?.)=li- <»'• 

Vn = vi; an = ai; mn = mi; (mnaj = (m^a*) (69). 

Since Bn = (n--1), and Si = fl — j; Sn = si, 
It follows that 

(n~l) = M--^ and 

H)=' ^''^- 

Equations 66 to 70, inclusive, pertain to the microcosm, with 

n<l.ll^ and ->0.90 
9 n 

The above developed relations are found partially exem- 
plified in Table I, and they serve for the calculation of the 
fundamental elements of the Space-Time Potential. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 263 

136. The Macrocosm and the Microcosm. 

The Space-Time Potential differentiates itself into two 
systems having distinctive properties. The first system is 
obedient to the dictates expressed by Equati9ns 57 to 65, 
inclusive, and the second system is submissive to the man- 
dates of Equations 66 to 70, inclusive. In the first system 
Sn does not equal s^; in the second system s« equals s^. 

The first system, that of unequal radii {Sn i= si) is 
represented in Fig. 27 and Table I, Appendix B. The first 
system is the macrocosmic system, the great world of mole- 
cules, bodies and planets. The second system is the micro- 
cosmic system, the small world of ''positons/' "energons/' 
electrons, and atoms. The second system is that of equal 
radii (s„ = s^) with the positive loci continuous with the 
corresponding negative loci. The change point bisects the 
vectorial distance between positive and negative loci of equal 
magnitude in the microcosm. This the change point does 
not do in the macrocosm. Some phases of the microcosm 
are shown in Table I, Continued, Appendix B. A rotary 

system corresponding ton = x and — = — in Table I, Con- 
tinued, is in dynamic equilibrium and constitutes an ele- 
mentary type of activity structure. We give to this elemen- 
tary type of microcosmic structure the name **energon." 
From the standpoint of the Space-Time Potential, the ener- 
gon is a unit composed of positive and negative work fac- 
tors of equal magnitude, eternally inseparable in the world 
of phenomenal interaction. Those mysterious antipodal 
activities, known as attraction and repulsion, no longer re- 
main enigmatical and unintelligible. Gravitational attrac- 
tions and electrical repulsions are but phases of interaction 
in the Space-Time Potential. The positive work factors of 
the energon is the basis of the so-called positive nucleus of 
the modern electronic theory. It no longer remains the 
elusive mystery of the electronic hypothesis, but becomes 
the well-defined complement in a structure typical of all 
microcosmic and macrososmic structures. 



APPENDIX E 

Electrolytic Ionization — The Kaufmann Effect — The 
Relation of Work Loci to the Atomic Structure 

AND DlVMETER — AvOGADRO'S CONSTANT — THE SPACE-TIME 

Potential Theory of Light Substantiated by Recent 
Astronomical Observations 

137. Electrolytic Ionization According to the Space-Time Po- 
tential. 

The Space-Time Potential enables us to comprehend the 
action in an electrolytic cell. Consider the rotary molecular 
system a-b of Fig. 31, existing in dynamic equilibrium. Let 
the solute system a-b be immersed in the solvent component 
c-d of the electrolytic cell A-B, a-b, c-d, shown in Fig. 34. 
The displacements of the solvent molecules of the system 
C'd by the solute molecules a-b results in a readjustment of 
work loci in a manner tending toward the restoration of 
equilibrium in the combined system A-B, a-b, c-d. Being 
a different molecular structure, the solvent system c-d dif- 
fers in the configuration of its work loci from the solute 
system a-b, consequently the unbalanced potential differ- 
ences initiated at immersion strive at once for a readjust- 
ment tending toward equilibrium. 

The modified system a-b plus the modified system c-d 
constitutes the electrolyte of the cell shown in Fig. 34. Let 
us now subject the combined system to an increasing differ- 
ence of potential. The modified system a-b is considered as 
existing in a state of rotation about its change point at the 
time when a potential difference is impressed upon the cell 
system. The increasing potential difference exerts a damp- 
ing influence upon the rotary system a-b. The angular velo- 
city decreases with an increase in the potential difference 
until it becomes equal to zero at the time when the decom- 
position voltage (B-A) —D has been reached. Simultaneously 
with this damping effect, the system a-b is displaced so that 

264 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 265 

its change point becomes coincident with the mobile re- 
sultant change point of the entire cell system. At the time 
when angular accelerations have become equal to zero, then 
linear accelerations are given to the systems a and b along 
the work line c w. Since the potential at w is not equal to 
the potential at c, it follows that the mobile factors in the 
cell must move continuously while a difference of potential 
between A and B is maintained. The mobile portions of the 
cell system strive to neutralize the potential difference be- 
tween A and B, As the resultant change point ^ moves 
toward B, the change point 3 of the system b-B precedes it 
and should arrive at B in advance of point ^. The system b 
must increase, for the distance C-S approaches zero more 
rapidly than the distance b-3, which also tends toward zero. 
Simultaneously with the beginning of an increase in the 
system b, we must have a decrease in the system a accom- 
panied by a retrograde motion of a. Fig. 36 shows the work 
relations which obtain to the system. The increment of 
work -\-ed is equal to the decrement of work — ed. Obser- 
vations in which these positive and negative work factors 
are clearly manifest are responsible for the creation of that 
interdependent action phase entity which is known as the 
charge. The fact is that the charge, regarded as a separate 
independent entity, does not exist. Work increments and 
decrements are the given data of experience; charges are 
conceptual conveniences resorted to in physico-mathematics. 
The work increment -\-ed appears at the electrode c, and 
simultaneously the work decrement — ed is found at the 
electrode w. The algebraic sum of the work done within 
the cell is zero. 

The Hittorf experiments no longer remain subject to the 
guesses of an "extraordinary hypothesis," but follow as 
consequences from the Space-Time Potential. In fact, none 
of the herinbefore enumerated objections to the ionic 
hypothesis remain as such for the relations pertaining to 
the Space-Time Potential, 



266 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 




SCIENTIFIC THEISM 267 

The scope of the present discussion makes it impossible 
to give further consideration to this phase of the subject, 
which, we realize, has been merely touched upon en passant, 
without in any way doing it justice. That part of our dis- 
cussion which pertains to the phenomenon of electrolysis 
must therefore be regarded as suggestive rather than re- 
plete with detail. 

138. The Kaufmann Effect. 

When a mass-acceleration kern or center passes suc- 
cessive work loci, the kern must obey the mandates of each 
consecutive locus and assume the mass-acceleration magni- 
tude which pertains to the particular locus at which it may 
be found during its migration. 

If the space s traversed in a unit of time be related to 
the distance K, the Kosmometer = 3x10^** centimeters; 
then we have from the fundamental relations of the Space- 
Time Potential ; 



i-('4)=(-^) 

l0ge(l-^) 



and 

W* 



Wi = logef-j = logefl-^j; fmiaij = 



S4 1. 

V 



This expression, evolved from our system of relative 
physical interaction and interdependence, describes mathe- 
matically the variation of the kern magnitude with the 
variation in velocity. 

In Table V the values derived from the expression of 
Lorentz-Einstein and the writer are compared with the 
observed values of Kaufmann. 



268 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 
TABLE V 



V 

V 


Lorentz- 
Einstein. 


Reuterdahl. 
lo.e|l-^J- 


Kaufmann. 
(Observed). 


V 

F 


0.75 


1.512 


1.8391 


1.65 


0.78 


1.598 


1.9315 


1.83 


0.80 


1.667 


2.000 


1.88 


0.83 


1.793 


2.1242 


2.09 


0.86 


1.960 


2.2748 


2.43 


0.88 


2.105 


2.3974 


2.73 


0.90 


2.294 


2.5472 


3.09 



139. The Relation of Work Loci to the Atomic Structure and 
Diameter. 

From Table I, Continued (Appendix B), we may de- 
rive our basic ideas concerning the structure of the atom. 
The work loci shown in this table constitute the orbits for 
the sub-atomic particles. We have previously stated that 
the sub-atomic particles are capable of variation in an as- 
cending and a descending manner from a neutral state — 
the energon. The orbits in the case of atoms are circular 
concentric work loci. The radial distances of the orbits are 
functions which depend upon the system and the funda- 
mental relations of the Space-Time Potential for their 
magnitude. If work is done upon or by the system, the 
components thereof undergo corresponding changes. The 
work loci configurations are modified to conform with the 
involved work factor. When an energon is caused to 
migrate from one work locus or orbit to another, it assumes 
that magniude which conforms with the work constant of 
the orbit upon which it becomes located. An energon 
located upon the outermost orbit of the atom is an electron. 
Passing inward toward the center, we find energons in 
various loci phases until we reach the limit of variation in 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 269 

the positon. We find, in fact, variations in the energonic 
condition which not only suggest the spectrum, but make it 
possible. Millikan makes the following statement concern- 
ing the justly famous Bohr atom: "Its chief difficulty 
arises from the apparent contradiction involved in a non- 
radiating electronic orbit — a contradiction which would 
disappear, however, if the negative electron itself, when 
inside the atom, were a ring of some sort capable of ex- 
panding to various radii, and capable, only when freed 
from the atom, of assuming essentially the properties of a 
point charge, such as we find it endowed with in experi- 
ments upon cathode rays, y?-rays, and ionization in gases."^ 
Millikan keenly realizes that a fixed primordial particle 
is incapable of explaining the phenomena in question. In 
this work we have repeatedly pointed out the necessity of 
variability in the primordial particle in conformity with 
the requirements of our universal relativity system. It is 
evident that the atom of the Space-Time Potential obviates 
entirely the difficulties encountered in the Bohr atom. It 
is also clear that the diameter of an atom cannot be re- 
garded as an absolutely fixed quantum. Whenever we 
speak of the diameter of an atom, therefore, we must de- 
fine the conditions imposed upon the system. By defining 
a normal condition we would be in a position to evaluate 
the corresponding diameter, which then would constitute 
the normal value. 

140. Avogadro's Constant. 

Table IV, Appendix B, affords the required data for 
the computation of Avogadro's Constant. The following 
relations are involved in the calculation : 

R = ampere-hours per gram per unit valence, 

^' = — . C.G.S. electrostatic units, 

V 

m = —r= actual mass of atom in grams, 

M — atomic mass of atom (ratios with hydrogen = 1.0) 

m 



Robert A. Millikan, The Electron, p. 216. 



270 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

The results of the calculations are given in Table VI. 

TABLE VI 
Avogardo's Constant 



Elements. 


m 


Hydrogen 


6.01685X10" 


Carbon 


6.03596X10" 


Nitrogen 


6.03027X10" 


Oxygen 


6.01975X10" 


Sodium 


6.02100X10" 


Potassium 


6.02931X10" 


Iron 


6.01180X10" 


Copper 


6.02134X10" 


Silver 


6.02219X10" 


Platinum 


6.01800X10" 


Lead 


6.02084X10" 


Average value 

of ^" 6.022482X10" 

For Hydrogen M = 1 . 000 



Transforming this average value of N' based upon Hydro- 
gen M = 1.000 to the Oxygen Standard M = 16, we have 

16.00 
^' =ir-oo- (6.022482X10") = 6.0679x10". 

141. The Space-Time Potential Theory of Light Substan- 
tiated by Recent Astronomical Observations. 
At the time when the fundamental concepts of the 
Space-Time Potential were developed, the writer was con- 
fident that future investigations in the field of physical 
astronomy would bring forth facts substantiating that por- 
tion of his work which dealt with the phenomenon of light 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 271 

as a particular case of universal interaction between mate- 
rial particles. The reader is referred to paragraph 76 
(Fields of Interaction) and paragraph 86 (Primary and 
Secondary Matter in the Role of Concurrent and Excitant 
Systems) . From these paragraphs and many other similar 
statements in the text it is evident that we regard light as 
a case of interaction between material particles. The path 
of an excitant particle in an interacting field like the sun's 
is then determined by the conditions set forth in paragraph 
76. The path of propagation of an excitant light particle 
must sustain deviation whenever the particle passes a body 
like the sun. The observations made of the total solar 
eclipse (May, 1919) prove conclusively that the path of 
propagation of light emanating from a star is deviated 
from its previously assumed rectilinear path when it passes 
near the sun. 

This astounding discovery proves: 

1. That light is a material and not an etherial 
phenomenon. 

2. That the ether medium is not a physical reality, but 
merely a mathematical myth. 

3. That the laws of the primordial particle (micro- 
cosm) are the laws of the universe (macrocosm) . 

4. That interdependence is universal in the unitary 
interacting system called the cosmos. 

The writer first held these views in the year 1896. The 
first published intimation of these conclusions appeared in 
Volume I, No. 1, of the Transactions of the American Elec- 
trochemical Society, April 5, 1902, under the title "The 
Atom of Electrochemistry." 

The amount of the deflection of light may be easily cal- 
culated without recourse to speculations concerning the 
fourth dimension and without the use of the theory of 
invariants. 

Consider the system composed of an excitant particle 
of mass m and the sun of mass M, Since m is small com- 
pared with M the center of gravity of the system may be 
regarded as coincident with the sun's center. Locate the 
combined mass (M+m) = M (since m is small) at this 
center of gravity. The sun's radius R will constitute the 



272 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

distance of nearest approach of the particle m moving along: 
its hyperbolic path into the sun's field of interaction. 
Let, 
t = transverse axis of the hyperbola. 
y = average velocity of the excitant particle m. The 
upper limit of v = V (the velocity of light) 
= 3.0x10^^ cms. per sec. The lower limit for 
excitation is taken at 10^^ cms. per sec. The aver- 
age value oi V = 2.0 xlO^^ cms. per sec. 
Vi = transverse velocity. 
V2 = initial relative velocity of m and M. 
R = distance of nearest approach of m to M = 6.95552 

X 10^^ cms. 
Y = constant of interaction. 
6 = the deflection. 

I = interactional intensity ; is a function of the inverse 
first power of the distance and the potential; 
I = (27.64x981) = 27,115 dynes. 
Then the following relations may be derived easily : 

^ = (M+m) ""' - ""^'^ = (M+m) ^ = ^' 
^ 2Av 2A 2A 

where A= Y(M+m) = Y M (since m is small) = I(R)2; 

I = 27,115 dynes; A = I (R)^ == 27,115 (6.95552 x 10i«)2 
=: 1.3118 xl02«; 

_ 2A^ _ 2 (1.3118 X 10^«) _ 

^1 - Rv = 6.95552 x lO^^ (2.0 x W) — 1-88599 x lO'^ 

V, 1.88599 X 10^ 
tan e=z ~ = 2.0 X 10^" = 9.42995-«; 6 = 1.95". 

The observed deflection was calculated from the data 
secured by the English Solar Expedition on May 29, 1919. 
Sir Frank Dyson states : "But the much better plates gave 
for the displacement at the limb 1.98"— Einstein's predicted 
value being 1.75"." (See "The Reflection of Light by Gravi- 
tation and The Einstein Theory of Relativity," in the 
Scientific Monthly for January, 1920, page 81.) 



APPENDIX F 

Interdependent and Independent Motion. The Inter- 
action Coefficients. Some Basic Fallacies 
OF Partial Relativity 

142. Interdependent and Independent Motion. 

The old notions of algebraic additivity of velocities still 
hold despite the fallacious interpretations put upon these 
relations by the partial relativists. The great service which 
the partial relativists have rendered to intellectual progress 
consists in their splendid and persistent insistence upon the 
general principle of relativity. It is regrettable, indeed, that 
they have grossly misinterpreted the meaning of their own 
results. They have failed to distinguish correctly between 
interdependent motion and independent motion just as they 
have failed to distinguish between real space and mathe- 
matical space. 

Absolutely independent motion is purely theoretical but 
it may be described in terms of formal space and time. In- 
dependent motion is closely simulated by two bodies moving 
under independent locomotion intensities. The analysis of 
independent motion resolves itself into a pure mathematical 
investigation involving the space and time forms. When we 
deal with actual physical motion we are confronted with 
interdependent interaction resultants that can be described, 
in part, in terms of the forms of space and time but which 
involve activity factors which transform and modify the 
merely formal results of a purely mathematical analysis 
into cases of genuine physical activity vectorials. These 
physical activity vectorials may be redescribed in terms of 
the pure forms of space and time but the redescription must 
take account of the effects of the interdependent factors of 
interaction. 

273 



274 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

The Principle of Algebraic Additivity holds for velocities 
pertaining to theoretical independent motion. Thus if, 
Vi = velocity of particle 1, 
Vj = velocity of particle 2, and 
Vr = relative velocity of particles 1 and 2, then 
a For Motions in the Same Directions, 

Vr = Vi — V^. 

b For Motions in the Opposite Directions, 

Vp = Vi + v^. 

143. Interdependent Motion as Exemplified in the Phenom- 
enon of Light. 

For the relations and magnitudes of the involved veloc- 
ities the reader is referred to Paragraph 108. We regard 
the velocity of light T as a constant ratio obtained by divid- 
ing the velocity of the excitant system Vn by the velocity of 
the concurrent system v*. 

From Paragraph 108 we have, 

V = relative velocity — — ^= velocity of light, 

V. = (V-1) ; and v* -^-^^. 

According to the Principle of Algebraic Additivity, 
V (the relative velocity) should equal (v^ + v*). 
When we substitute the known values of v„ and v^, however, 
we find; 

(V-1) (V^-1) 



(v„ + va) =: (V-~l) + 



V - V 



(V2 1) 

Be it noted that, ^ — ,^j—^ is less than V, This proves 

conclusively that a direct application of the Principle of 
Algebraic Additivity apparently fails in the case of Inter- 
dependent Motion. This failure is due to the introduction of 
genuine activity factors which produce a new configuration 
in the original theoretical system. Vectorial resultants of 
interaction have been produced and it is futile to expect them 
to have the same magnitudes as the factors in the purely 
theoretical system. Therefore we cannot expect these trans- 
formed factors of interaction to conform with the Principle 
of Algebraic Additivity unless we allow for the magnitude 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 275 

of the transformation. Be it noted, however, that the Prin- 
ciple of Algebraic Additivity is applicable to the actual, true 
magnitudes of the vectorial resultants. The apparent fail- 
ure of this Principle is due therefore to a misinterpretation 
of physical facts and a consequent misapplication of the 
Principle. 

144. Independent Motion. The Additivity Principle and the 
Velocity of Light. 

We have seen in the preceding paragraph that it is in- 
correct to apply the Principle of Algebraic Additivity to the 
interaction factors involved in the phenomenon of light un- 
less we make due allowance for a genuine physical trans- 
formation due to interaction. We shall now investigate the 
requirements of the Additivity Principle in the case of the 
phenomenon of light. 
Let, 

Ve — the velocity of the excitant system operating 

under the Principle of Additivity, 
Vc = the velocity of the concurrent system actuat- 
ing under this same Principle, 

V = relative velocity = — ^ = velocity of light. 

* 

In order that the relations may conform with the require- 
ments of the Principle of Additivity we must have, 

V^ ^ V 

V„=TTT-r^rr . and v„= 



(V+1) ' """ ^c-(v_|_i)- 
The Principle of Additivity for motions in opposite direc; 
tions as in the present case requires that, 

V-Ve+V,. 

Substituting the previous values of v^ and v^ in the 
above relations we obtain, 
T7_ . _ V^ , V _ V(V+1) _v 

V_Ve +Vo-(y^^) + (V+1)- (V + 1) 

Moreover, these values of v^ and v^ satisfy the re- 
quirement that, 



^•=v== 



(V+1) 



276 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

We cannot expect that these values of 'y^ and v^ shall be 
equal respectively to the values of Vn and v^ given in Para- 
graph 143 because they do not refer to the same magnitudes. 
The values v^ and v^ refer to simple independent theoret- 
ical motion. The values Vn and v^ refer to vectorial inter- 
action resultants due to the simultaneous interaction of 
transverse and longitudinal activity factors. Therefore 
there is no real discrepancy in the respective values because 
they do not refer to the same factors. 

Consequently it is a gross fallacy to attempt to place the 
blame for this apparent discrepancy upon a fictitious four 
or n — dimensional manifold. The mathematical legerde- 
main of the four-dimensional conjurors is interesting and 
exciting but it is a colossal fallacy to try to force real 
physical phenomena into the phantasmagoria of a non-exist- 
ent, unreal hypothetical space. 

145. The Interaction Coefficient in the Case of Light. 

The relations between interdependent and independent 
motion may be expressed as coefficients to which we give the 
name "Interaction Coefficients." The Interaction Coefficient 
I^ for Light may be derived from the expressions given in 
Paragraphs 143 and 144 as follows : 
V^— 1 



L = 



v« + vj^ _ V (V^— 1) 



v« 



(V— 1) _ (V^ 



(V+1) 
(V-~-l) 



= (-4.) 



I = ^±- = V = (v— 1) 



v„ 



= 0-4r) 



In this form we recognize our Interaction Coefficient as 
the Fundamental Scalar of the Einstein Relativity for the 
case of a unit velocity and the velocity V. 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 277 

The Genital Number n and the Interaction Coefficient 
/ are related as follows : 

(V^ 1) 

^L = Tf^ — - ; n == V, therefore 



1. - . 

For ordinary interacting and interdependent systems the 
involved velocities will be small in comparison with the 
velocity of light. The preceding discussion refers to the 
maximum condition which pertains to the velocity of light. 
It follows that the genital numbers in the case of the Inter- 
action Coefficient I^ for light are V and 1; that is, in the 
secondary or logarithmic function we have included the 
Change Point (See Table I, Appendix-B). 

In the case of the General Interaction Coefficient 7^, 
the genital numbers of the system may be in general, desig- 
nated as n and a. In that case 7^ becomes identical with 
II when n reaches its maximum value V and a reaches its 
minimum value, that is, unity. The unit of measurement 
employed may readily be so chosen that a = 1 in the limiting 
case. 

For the general case with the Interaction Coefficient = 
Iq we see that : 

n < V, n > a, and a > 1. 
In the limiting case when Iq = II, we have: 
n = V and, a = 1. 

146. General Case of Interdependent Motion. 

The genital numbers n and a are related to the velocities 
Vn and Vi by the following expressions: 

v.= (n-a) ; vi = (^— - — j = -^^ 

^ ^ (nz±) ^an. 
VA (n— a) 

an 

(n — a) (n — a) (an + 1) 



(Vtk + Vi) =(n— a) + 



an an 



278 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

These relations follow as consequents from the Funda- 
mental Relations of the Space-Time Potential. See Para- 
graphs 135 and 143. 

147. General Case of Independent Motion. 

It is clear from an inspection of the above in conjunction 
with Paragraph 144 that for the genital numbers n and a, 
the velocities v^ and v^ are given by the following ex- 
pressions ; 

n^ n 

Ve = —r: — I — rr > ^c = 



(n + a) ' ^^ " a(n + a) * 
n^ 



(n + a) 

■^^ ■ ^— — an. 



a(n + a) 



(V + V )- -^ + 5 - nian_+_l)_ 

We -f ve;_ (n_|_a)^a(n + a) ~ a(n + a) 



148. General Interaction Coefficient. 



(n — a) (an -f- 1) 
(Vg + VJr) ^ an _(: 

(Ve + Ve) n(an + 1) 
a(n + a) 



T yvg -h vjt; an _ (n^ — a^) _/^ a^X 



Ig = 


Vtt 
Ve 


(n— a) 


n^ 




(n + a) 






(n— a) 


la = 


Vc 


an 


n 



(n— a) ^ (n^—a^) ^ (.^£\ 
n^ n^ \ nV 



n^ V nV 

a(n + a) 



\/'^- a/i-^- 



X ^= 1. 



v* v« 



Consider the right triangle ABC in which the hypotenuse 
AB = v^, BC — Vn, and included angle at B = 0, then; 



^=cos.= I.= (l-0 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 279 

Similarly for the right triangle DEF in which the hypo- 
tenuse DE = v^, EF — v^, and included angle at £* = 
then; 



^^=cos.=I.=(l_-|-). 



V* 



Now consider the right triangle GHI in which the hypo- 
tenuse GH = n, HI — |/ (n^-a^) , IG = a, and the angle H 
included between GH and HI = 6, then ; 



This is the Fundamental Scalar Relation of the Einstein 
Relativity. In Professor Richard C. Tolman^s work entitled, 
"The Theory of the Relativity of Motion" (1917), this 
Fundamental Einstein Scalar occurs on nearly every page. 
Tolman's excellent work is, in the main, an exposition of the 
Einstein and Minkowski theories of relativity. 

The Minkowski theory is a case of four-dimensional 
vector analysis. The whole theory of relativity is therefore 
built upon and around this Fundamental Scalar Relation. 
The relativists derive this relation from the well known 
Pythagorean Theorem. They derive their basic relation 
from the purely geometrical relations which pertain to a 
right triangle. These purely geometrical relations are then 
imposed upon physical phenomena. The results are often 
misinterpreted because of their confused and erroneous no- 
tions concerning space and time which have led them into 
the quagmires of an unreal four-dimensional space. It is 
unfortunate that the relativists are not philosophers now 
that they have been forced into this field which science has 
vainly attempted to belittle by inuendo and ridicule. 

The writer has derived this Fundamental Scalar directly 
from those basic relations of interaction which constitute the 
norms of his Theory of Interdependence. The author de- 
velops this important Scalar directly from the fundamental 
laws of action whereas the relativists develop it from a 
purely geometrical relation whose connection with action is 
thereafter sought. The method used by the relativists is 
replete with possibilities of misinterpreting the significance 
and genuineness of the hoped for connections between this 



280 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

purely geometrical relation and actual physical action. The 
author has shown in the above the real significance of this 
scalar as an Interaction Coefficient. 

The following subsidiary relations may readily be de- 
duced from the foregoing : 

n (n + a) n / , x /n \ /n \ Ve 



:,/ (n + a ) /(n 
V (II -a) V " 



V(n^— a^)-. /(n + a).^ /(n^—a^ _ ^ /(an)^ (n + a) 



Vft V (n-a) V Vi V (n— a) 



4/(n2— a=^)_^ 4/(n2_a2) v, 



V4 Va Vi 



= an. 



149. The Basic Fallacy of Relativity. 

Tolman, in the work cited above (page 30), makes the 
following statement : "We thus find that two observers, A 
and B, who are in relative motion will not in general agree 
in their measurements of the time interval necessary for a 
given event to take place." He states further that time in- 
tervals made with a moving clock must be multiplied by the 
"Einstein Scalar" in order to agree with measurements 
made with a stationary system of clocks. 

A complete web of confusions has grown about this 
primary and basic confusion of relativity. The Tolman ref- 
erence deals with the geometrical relations which pertain 
to the sides of a right triangle as stated by the Pythagorean 
Theorem. 

The whole matter hinges upon our interpretation of the 
geometrical relations which hold for the right triangle ABC, 
whose hypotenuse is AB, in conjunction with the velocity of 
light. The triangle ABC, according to the relativists, con- 
tains the relativity norms for a moving system when com- 
pared with the single normal line BC, In this moving 
system ABC the base of the triangle, that is AC indicates the 
direction of the motion of the moving system ABC, The 
relativists argue that for a stationary observer the path of 
a light ray reflected from a mirror parallel to AC in the mov- 
ing system ABC would be given by the hypotenuse AB in- 
stead of by the normal BC to the mirror. There arises there- 
fore, they contend, a genuine relativity of time which must 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 281 

be taken account of whenever a stationary observer at- 
tempts to make time measurements of a moving system. 
From the Pythagorean Theorem the relativists conclude 
that: 



(BO* , (AC)* and^^ - ' /^ ^^^^ 



= ^- 



(AB)* ~ (AB)*' AB ~ V (AB)** 

The conclusion is, according to the relativists, that it ap- 
parently takes a longer time for the same experiment in the 
moving system than in the stationary system when both 
times are measured by the stationary observer. If the sta- 
tionary observer finds that the experiment in the moving 
system is performed in 1 second then the same experiment 
performed in his stationary system will only require that 
portion of a second which is expressed by the Einstein 
Scalar, that is, 



V 



(AC)* . , 

of a second. 



(AB) 

For this reason we must turn the whole world topsy- 
turvy; clocks must be properly set in moving systems, and 
space must be suitably "warped'* in order to allow for these 
relativistic distortions. A further relief from this cosmic 
pandemonium may be had through the use of the relativistic 
panacea known as the fourth-dimension which is capable of 
warping and distorting reality to a degree satisfactory to 
the most exacting mathematician. 

The relativists have placed a most curious misinterpre- 
tation upon the alleged relations between stationary and 
moving systems. We find Hermann Minkowski attempting 
a synthesis of space and time into a basic unitary world 
tetrad masquerading as a four-dimensional reality. 

Let us inquire into the real significance of the results 
of the two experiments cited above. We at once admit that, 
with the velocity of light constant, the times required to 
traverse two paths of unequal length will be unequal. A 
greater time period will be required for the longer path. 
In this there is nothing remarkable. In fact it is nothing 
other than would be dictated by common sense which is 
and always has been a rare intellectual jewel. If the path 
of a ray of light be along the hypotenuse AB of a right 



282 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

triangle then the time required to traverse this path will 
be longer than the time required to make the traverse over 
the normal line BC of the same right triangle because the 
hypotenus AB is longer than the altitude BC of the same 
right triangle. This is true irrespective of the method em- 
ployed in causing a ray of light to travel over these two 
paths. It is equally true for both the stationary and the 
moving system. Moreover the stationary observer can ar^ 
range, by a suitable disposition of the source of light, to 
exactly reproduce both experiments. Since light is a mate- 
rial system it is evident that it v^ill be subject to the re- 
sultant effects of the interacting intensities. Therefore 
if the velocity of the moving system is commensurate 
with the length AC of the base of the triangle we must 
expect the resultant path of the ray of light to be modified 
accordingly. In other words, the path of the ray will be 
AB and not BC, The resulting path AB is therefore due to 
the simultaneous action of two vectorial intensities com- 
mensurate with the velocity of light and the velocity of 
translation of the moving system. The stationary observer 
can arrange, by a suitable disposition of the source of light 
in relation to a proper location of his point of observation, 
to reproduce the magnitude involved in the moving system. 
There will be no difference in the results produced. The 
only difference will be in the method of producing these 
results. Therefore he may derive the same inferences from 
the stationary system, by a new distribution of the elements 
of the experiment, as may be derived from his observation 
of the moving system. Moreover, it is futile for him to 
attempt to measure the time of traverse of the normal ray 
BC in the moving system, because the fact of motion pre- 
cludes all possibility of making such measurement. Further- 
more, unless light was an instantaneous phenomenon, re- 
quiring no time for its propagation, an observer located 
upon the moving system would find it impossible to pro- 
duce a normally reflected ray from a light source regarded 
as a fixed point. 

It is therefore evident that the stationary observer has 
not and cannot observe a normally reflected ray (BC) in 
a moving system ABC. What he can observe is the result- 
ant path and its time period. This resultant path is along 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 283 

the hypotenuse AB and since this is longer than the normal 
BC the time period of the former will be longer than the 
time period of the latter provided that the velocity of light 
is constant which is here assumed. By knowing the velocity 
of the moving system he can duplicate the involved vectorial 
magnitudes upon his stationary system. Therefore he need 
not concern himself at all with the complicated readjust- 
ment and setting of clocks in order to derive correctly all 
the inferences which can be derived from both experiments. 
In fact he did not measure the time for the normal path BC 
in the moving system but he measured the time element in- 
volved in a totally different path, that is, the hypotenuse AB 
of the moving system ABC, This time element he can more 
easily measure on his own stationary system by a proper 
readjustment of his experiment in a manner allowing for 
the velocity of the moving system. 

The relativists have therefore rediscovered the astound- 
ing facts that, 1st, it takes light a longer time to traverse a 
longer path than it does to traverse a shorter path; and 
2nd, they have also found that the old Pythagorean 
Theorem is a means of finding the relative lengths of the 
sides of a right triangle. Because of these astounding dis- 
coveries we are requested to accept, without protest, a new 
relativistic science built upon the quicksands of non-Eucli- 
dean geometry. Be it noted that they used Euclidean 
geometry in deriving their basic relation. 

Utter confusion reigns amongst the relativists in regard 
to their notions of the significance of space and time. For 
them space and time arise, as it were, from some super- 
mundane single essence abiding in the fourth-dimension. 
This single essence is, however, a tetrad capable of a four- 
way subdivision into coordinates conforming with the appe- 
tite of their four-dimensional Frankenstein. The relativists 
have, however, rendered mankind a great service in bring- 
ing forcibly before the world the general notion of relativity 
despite the fact that they have so grossly misinterpreted 
the real significance of their theory. 

In his Theory of Interdependence the writer has shown 
that space and time are two distinct forms of apprehension, 
just as distinct as two separate particles of matter. Never- 
theless, they are no more distinct than two particles of 



284 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

matter because all particles of matter are interdependent 
in their physical manifestation. Space and time, although 
not identities possess interdependent significance in the 
interpretation of all the manifold types of activity. 

We have shown in the above that the Fundamental 
Scalar of Relativity has its real origin and root in inter- 
action from v^hich it can be derived directly without the 
subterfuge of a mere geometrical relation. We have further 
shown that the vectors of interdependent motion may be re- 
lated to the vectors of independent motion by vectorial com- 
ponents indicating transverse and longitudinal interaction 
intensities, describable geometrically by means of a right 
triangle which involves the author's Interaction Coefficient 
which is identical in its algebraic value with the Scalar of 
Relativity. Its real significance, however, appears in the 
writer's Theory of Interdependence. The relativists have 
failed utterly in their attempt to relate this Scalar to genu- 
ine activity. 

150. Further Criticism of the Theory of Relativity. 

Einstein first outlined the preliminary postulates of 
relativity in a paper which appeared in Annalen der Physik, 
in 1905. In this paper he considered the meaning of events 
occurring in different locations. We have it on the authority 
of his disciple. Professor A. S. Eddington, that Einstein's 
theory of gravitation, which follows as a consequent of his 
theory of space and time, was formulated sometime during 
the year 1915 (see Professor Eddington's article entitled 
"Einstein's Theory of Space and Time" in The Contem- 
porary Review of December, 1919, page 640) . 

Sir Oliver Lodge pertinently criticises the Theory of 
Relativity in a paper entitled "The New Theory of Gravity" 
which appeared in the December issue of the Nineteenth 
Century and After (see pages 1195, 1196, 1199, and 1200). 
We quote the following from this paper : 

"The theory — further developed by Minkowski in 1908, 
and adopted or modified by de Sitter, Silberstein, Eddington, 
and others later — lays its hands not only on ether and 
matter, on light and gravitation, but attacks the fundamen- 
tal conceptions of Space and Time also. It evolves a gen- 
eralized theory of gravity to which the Newtonian theory 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 285 

is a close approximation. It attributes inertia to energy 
(not for the first time). It gives a theory of Space of 
which Euclidean space may be regarded as a special case. 
It involves a theory of Time v^hich may be described as 
requiring four co-ordinates instead of three, to fix a posi- 
tion, and virtually making Time an aspect of a fourth 
dimension of Space. The timing of events on this theory 
becomes extremely complicated; it is barely possible to say 
even v^^hen two events are simultaneous, or to offer a 
criterion as to what is meant by simultaneity. Gravitation 
becomes a property of Space — of four-dimensional Time- 
Space — it therefore affects everything that occurs in space. 
There are ten possible coefficients instead of the common 
quality g, the intensity of gravity. A ray of light is not 
straight ; the path of "least action" is affected by a gravita- 
tional field, which acts like a change in optical density and 
so causes a sort of refraction. Also the frequency of light- 
vibrations is reduced by the neighborhood of a massive 
body. The first law of motion, even, requires re-wording, 
since gravity is not a force but a property of 'crumpled' 
Space. The theory of relativity is a limitation, and at the 
same time a complication, of human knowledge." 

Continuing on pages 1199, and 1200, Sir Oliver Lodge 
states, "But the *warp' idea gives us a weird kind of infinity 
that simulates some of the properties of finiteness; Space 
could never be transcended, we should never arrive at a 
boundary wherever we start and however far we travel, and 
yet our environment would not be exactly what we have tried 
to conceive as infinite." 

"The present writer," Sir Oliver Lodge says, "holds it 
dangerous to base such far-reaching consequences, even if 
anything like them can legitimately be drawn — which is 
doubtful — on a predicted effect which may after all be 
accounted for and expressed in simpler fashion. Our admi- 
ration for the brilliant way in which the fact was arrived 
at must not make us too enthusiastically ready to assimilate 
the whole complicated theory out of which it arose. So 
far as the present writer understands the theories of Ein- 
stein and Minkowski, he does not feel compelled to admit 
an essential warp or twist in Space." 

This splendid criticism of the Theory of Relativity is in 



286 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

complete harmony with the author's views expressed in the 
above. The author severely criticised the vaporous specula- 
tions of the non-Euclidean geometers in his paper "The 
Atom of Electrochemistry" which apeared in 1902. Now 
the relativists are attempting the erection of a new scientific 
structure upon the quagmires of non-Euclidean speculations 
concerning unreality. 

The writer again wishes to record his vigorous protest 
against this "undignified nonsense" and he herewith reiter- 
ates his plea for a return to sanity and common sense. 

151. A Brief Criticism of 

"Einstein's Theory of Space and Time." 

Professor Eddington, in his article "Einstein's Theory 
of Space and Time," referred to in the preceding paragraph, 
states the following : 

"In Einstein's view, since the space (b) is not revealed 
by physical measurements, there is no conceivable reason 
for believing in its existence; and in any case it does not 
concern us. Hence for him space is always and solely 
measured space. We cannot predict a priori what will 
happen to measuring — appliances in a strong field of gravi- 
tation, hence we cannot predict what kind of space will be 
there. It turns out that it is probably non-Euclidean, or, 
as it is popularly expressed, warped. But all the metaphysi- 
cal implication disappears when we remember that this is 
merely a statement about the unusual behavior of measur- 
ing — appliances in unusual circumstances." 

"The reader may perhaps think that it is a bathos that 
all the talk of the warping of space should come to nothing 
more than this ; but he must remember that the space that 
is warped is actually the space of perception. The judg- 
ments of his senses are physical measures, though crude; 
and the applicances of the laboratory merely assist and 
refine these judgments without altering their character. 
We are inclined to overlook the channel of sense-measures 
by which external nature is presented to the mind, and to 
think that in some way the mind is directly acquainted with 
things outside us. So far from this being true, two of the 
most essential features in our mental picture of the external 
world — viz., space and time, are not actually in the external 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 287 

world, but are introduced into the picture in the course of 
transmission through sense-channels to our brains." 

"In every observation the observer has a share as im- 
portant as that of the thing which is observed. With the 
observer I include any measuring-apparatus he may use to 
improve the judgments of his sense. Einstein's achievement 
is a separation of the shares of the observer and of external 
nature far more complete than hitherto, and opposed to the 
separation which through long generations we have in- 
stinctively adopted. He assigns space and time solely to 
the observer; in nature there is left something which for 
want of a better name we may call space-time. In a sense 
it is a combination of space and time, but it has lost the 
more familiar qualities of both. It arouses curiosity because 
it has four dimensions" 

"The observer himself is in nature and he is passing 
through this four-dimensional 'something.' Let us see 
what he makes of it. He is sitting in his armchair making 
no conscious effort to change position ; nevertheless, he per- 
ceives that he is not stationary in the great world — he is 
progressing along time. He makes a conscious effort and 
walks about the room; now he is progressing in space. 
Thus he splits up this four-dimensional thing ; that direction 
in which he progresses without conscious effort is time, 
other directions are space" 

"Relegating space and time to their proper source — the 
observer — Einstein bids us contemplate the residuum of 
what we observe. This residuum is the true world. It is 
shapeless, because we have abstracted space ; yet it is metri- 
cal and has quantitative properties which can be expressed 
in mathematical terms. Clearly we cannot describe this 
true world in terms of familiar things, because the whole 
point of Einstein's theory is that we must abstract the ideas 
which we ourselves have added in order to form familiar 
things. Further, the laws of nature must relate to this 
four-dimensional residuum, and the space and time we our- 
selves introduce cannot be relevant. This led Einstein to 
the conclusion that Newton's law of gravitation, which 
refers to one particular separation of space and time, cannot 
be the exact law ; and he proposed a new law applicable to a 



288 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

four-dimensional world, which has now been strikingly jus- 
tified by observation." 

The above excerpts from Professor Eddington's article 
constitute an able an concise summary of the pseudo-meta- 
physical position of Einstein. We shall now critically con- 
sider the various contentions set forth in the preceding sum- 
mary of Einstein's position. 

We are told that since space is not revealed by physical 
measurements, there is no conceivable reason for believing 
in its existence. Is that interaction phase known to science 
as energy revealed by physical measurement? It is revealed 
no more and no les§ than space is by physical measurement. 
As an independent tentity moving about the physical uni- 
verse it is not revealed by any physical observation. What 
we observe are changes and transformations in material 
systems. We have never been able and never will be able 
to isolate energy as an independent existence. Nevertheless 
the term energy is a scientific admission that a genuine 
activity principle exists which accounts for the actuality of 
physical phenomena. No scientist can sanely deny the 
existence of this actuating principle upon the meagre 
grounds that he has not been able to isolate it by means 
of measuring-appliances. If the relativists elevate energy 
to a position of independence what then becomes of their 
alleged theory of relativity? It no more follows that because 
science has not been able to isolate the forms of apprehen- 
sion, space and time, therefore both are non-existent. Their 
actuality is revealed through interaction of subject and 
object. The activity principle is also revealed to the sub- 
ject by observations of the changes in the objective world. 

We are also informed that it is impossible to predict a 
priori what will happen to measuring-appliances in a strong 
field of gravitation, hence we cannot predict what kind of 
space will be there. It turns out, we are told, that it is 
probably non-Euclidean, or, as it is popularly expressed, 
warped. If something happens to the measuring-appli- 
ances, if they are warped or deformed, we naturally inquire 
into the cause of this change. Einstein and Eddington, 
judging from Eddington's statements quoted above, rush to 
the conclusion that space is non-Euclidean or warped. Do 
they mean to tell us that space is an activity principle capa- 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 289 

ble of warping the measuring-appliances? Possibly time 
did the warping. 

Why refer to the "strong field of gravitation" at all if 
space or time were at the bottom of the warping phenome- 
non? Perhaps the strong field of gravitation first warped 
space which, in turn, was then able to warp the measuring- 
appliances. Of course it may be that the non-Euclidean 
warped space created the strong gravitational field which 
then affected the instruments. The final possibility is that 
the measuring-appliances themselves caused a general cos- 
mic disturbance which retaliated by inflicting a warped 
condition on the cause of the disturbance. 

From these possibilities the relativists arbitrarily select 
one possibility, that is, warped space, because this fits in 
with their mathematcal speculations. Instead of forcing 
mathematics to conform with and truly represent reality, 
unreality must exist because it conforms with mathematical 
speculation. Non-Euclidean space is merely a product of 
mathematical imagination. It has no genuine reality other 
than conceptual. Nevertheless the relativists insist that the 
physical world must conform to this distorted and warped 
creature of their imagination. Mathematics is an a priori 
science grounded in depths of logical conscious life. 
Euclidean geometry conforms with the requirements of this 
logical mental life. It also conforms with the requirements 
of the external world which is three-dimensional. This is 
true because there is genuine interaction between the con- 
scious and the unconscious world which are interdependent. 
Space and time therefore are not only of the subject but 
they are rooted in the depths of reality and because there 
is interaction and interdependence in the unitary cosmos 
therefore the mental world of Euclidean or three-dimen- 
sional properties agrees with the physical and external 
world. The non-Euclidean or four-dimensional world is 
an imaginary world based upon assumptions which have no 
genuine counterpart in the real physical world. The mills 
of mathematical logic grind with unerring truth and pre- 
cision but the machinery of mathematics neither creates 
nor guarantees that its resulting products represent reality 
truly. The assumptions that are introduced into the in- 
fallible mathematical machine must be absolutely truthful 



290 SCIENTIFIC THEISM 

representations of reality if the resulting products are to be 
labeled true and real. 

The attempt of the relativists to merge space and time 
into a "root entity" which they name "space-time" and 
which is supposed to be a four-dimensional reality fails 
completely because of the insuperable difference between 
extension and duration. The distinction between space and 
time exists in the very foundations of the cosmos. If this 
distinction did not exist in the objective would it could 
never become known to the conscious subjective world for 
the reason that space and time are not mere concepts but 
they are genuine elements of reality. Therefore the observer 
does not "split up this four-dimensional thing" as Einstein 
and Eddington maintain. Moreover, neither space nor time 
is a thing and consequently any alleged amalgamation of the 
two cannot be termed a thing. Furthermore we are re- 
quested to contemplate the world residuum after we have 
substracted the contributions of the observer. We are told 
that the remainder is the true world and that it is shapeless, 
Einstein thus presents us with a modern revision of the 
thing-in-itself of Kant with the profound philosophical in- 
sight of Kant totally absent from his four-dimensional 
intellectual product. We have pointed out the fallacies in 
the Kantian thing-in-itself in preceding paragraphs. The 
same criticisms hold, for this modern unphilosophical per- 
version. Eddington is careful to warn us that "all the meta- 
physical implication disappears when we remember that this 
is merely a statement about the unusual behavior of measur- 
ing-appliances in unusual circumstances." Why then, we 
ask, bring into the argument this pseudo-metaphysical four- 
dimensional space creature which is assumed capable of 
producing "warped" acts? If an iron rod expands under 
the influence of heat why attribute this change to the 
activity of a "warped space" which is neither an action 
agent nor a thing? Why not admit that common sense is 
correct in assigning the cause of this change in length of 
the iron rod to the presence of a real activity principle? 
Similarly we demand that if measuring-appliances undergo 
a change in "a strong field of gravitation" then the cause 
of this change is to be found in the activity intensities in- 
volved in the gravitational field and not in a fictitious warped 



SCIENTIFIC THEISM 291 

space which is neither action agent nor thing. The result 
of interaction may be in part described in terms of space (of 
three dimensions) and time but space and time are not the 
causes of any physical change whatsoever. 

The inadvertent invasion of the realm of philosophy and 
metaphysics by the relativists constitutes a monumental in- 
dication of the necessity of a complete revision of the rela- 
tive values of the various branches of knowledge. One may 
say that in a day an intellectual revolution has been accom- 
plished. Science has been forced to incorporate philosophy 
into its scheme of things. Metaphysics has become an in- 
tegral part of physics. Although these first philosophical 
attempts of the relativists resemble the first efforts of a 
child to walk, nevertheless they deserve commendation be- 
cause they indicate emancipation from the scientific bias of 
the past. From now on philosophy and metaphysics must 
be regarded as the foundation upon which the future edifice 
of science must rest. No serious student of science can now 
afford to ignore philosophy and metaphysics. Upon this 
foundation the new science will become a crystal through 
which mankind may see God, 



INDEX TO AUTHORS 

N, B. — The figures refer to the numbered paragraphs 



Ampere, 39 
Armstrong, H. E., 112 
Avogadro, 41 

Beltrami, 110 

Berkely, 64 

Bernoulli, Daniel, 18, 44 

Bessel, 126 

Bohr, 139 

Bolyai, 110 

Boscovich, 18, 22, 39, 44, 57, 80 Maxwell, Clerk, 46, 47 



Laplace, 39 

Leibnitz, 39 

Leucippus, 39 

Lie, Sophus, 110 

Lobatchevsky, 110 

Lodge, Sir Oliver, 150 

Lorentz, 76, 108, 138, Table V 

McDougall, 55 
Mach, 110 



Bruno, 39 

Campbell, N. R., 54 
Cayley, 110 
Coulomb, 56 

Dalton, 40 
Delboeuf, 110 
Democritus, 39 
Descartes, 44 

Eddington, 150, 151 
Einstein, Albert, 109, 138, 

Table V, 150, 151 
Engel, 110 
Euclid, 110 
Euler, 49 

Faraday, 20, 39 
Fechner, 39 
Fitzgerald, G. F., 112 

Gauss, 110 
Grassmann, 110 

Halsted, 110 
Heaviside, 18 
Hegel, 39, 67 
Helmholtz, 49, 82, 110 
Heracleitus, 39, 67 
Hertz, 46 

Kant, 39, 66, 67 



Mellor, J. W., 112 
Michelson, A. A., 108 
Millikan, R. A., 107, 132, 139 
Minkowski, 148, 150 
Mosotti, 53 

Nagaoka, 109 
Newcomb, 110 

Newton, 7 (Synopsis), 94, 96, 
101 

Parmenides, 39 
Pearson, Karl, 50 
Poincare, 108, 110, 111 
Poisson, 53 

Riemann, 110 

Russell, 110 

Rutherford, Sir E., 18, 109 

Schopenhauer, 66 
Searle, 18 
Spinoza, 67 
Stevinus, 59 
Stackel, 110 
Swedenborg, 39 

Thales, 39 

Thomson, Sir J. J., 12, 13, 18, 
20, 79, 107, 109, 132 



Kaufmann, 18, 41, 58, 79, 108, Tolman, 148, 149 

r. ^^?' ^?? oo Parley, 79 

Kelvin, 49, 82 Voltaire, 44 

Kepler, 95, 96, 99, 126 
Klein, 110 



Wilson, H. A., 107, 132 



293 



INDEX TO SUBJECT 
N. B. — :The figures refer to the numbered paragraphs 



Absolute, 82 

freedom, 124 

reality, 18 (Synopsis), 122 

truth, 124 
Acceleration, 5, 9 

phase, 62 
Accident, 92 
Action, 61 

phase, 62 
Action at a distance, 13, 18, 

21,44 
Activity principle, 9 
Ascending processes, 30, 112 
Atheism, 91 
Atom, 17 (Synopsis), 13, 40 

divisibility of, 19 

structure of Bohr's, 139 

structure of Nagaoka's, 109 

structure of Rutherford's, 
109 

structure of Space-Time 

Potential, 109, 139 

structure of Thomson's, 
20, 109 
Atomic masses, 132, Table IV 
Atomic mass moduli, 132, 

Table III 
Avogadro's constant, 140, 

Table VI 
Beta rays, 41, 79 
Cartesian development of Kep- 

lerian Laws, 96 
Categories of reality, 122 
Causes, primary and second- 
ary, 89 
Cell action, 112 
Central forces according to 

Poincare, 111 
Chance, 123 
Change point, 104, 129 
Chaos, 8 



Charge e, 107 

calculated by the Primary 
Functions of Space-Time 
Potential, 132 

calculated by the Secondary 
Functions of Space-Time 
Potential, 134 
Chemically equivalent atomic 

masses, 132, Table II 
Closed chain of concepts, 6, 10, 

22 
Concepts of science, 59 
Conceptual bridges, failure of, 

16 
Concurrent system, 29, 61, 77, 

82, 86 

in conjunction with excitant 
system as basis of phe- 
nomena of light and elec- 
tric oscillations, 108 

materialization of, 80 
Conscious and unconscious 

world, 121 
Conscious centers, character- 
istics of, 122 
Conscious world, 120 
Constants, developed from the 

Space-Time Potential, 132 
Contact in space, futile, 71 
Corpuscles, negative, 20 
Cosmos, 8, 23, 
Cosmos and teleology, 23 
Cosmic theories, ancient, 39 
Daniell cell, 114 
Deism, 91 

Descending processes, 30, 112 
Deterministic characteristics 

of elementals, 43 
Dualism of science, 37 
Dynamic equilibrium, 104 
Ecliptic, its obliquity, 100 



295 



296 



INDEX TO SUBJECT 



Electric current, 80 

as transformed mechanical 
energy, 85 
Electric field, 12 
Electrochemical equivalent per 

unit valence, 132, Table II 
Electrolytic ionization accord- 
ing to the Space-Time Po- 
tential, 137 
Electron, 30 
birth of, 84 

theory according to the 
Space-Time Potential, 131 
Electrons, flow of, 80 
Empirical position of science, 

7 
Energon, 28 
gyratory, 83 

three phases of, 30, 84, 112, 
114 
Energosial or concurrent sys- 
tem, 82 
Energy, 5, 9 

of electronic repulsion, 96 
phase, 63 
English Solar Eclipse Expedi- 
tion (year 1919), substan- 
tiating theories of Space- 
Time Potential, 141 
Entities of science, two alien, 

42 
Ether, 5, 44, 46, 50, 54, 75 
an irrational convenience un 

known, 34 
and materialism, 17 
assumed capable of exerting 
pressure on moving ele- 
mentals, 76 
critical analysis of hypothe- 
sis, 52, 53 
criticism of, by N. R. Camp- 
bell, 54 
inconsistent content of 

hypothesis, 51 
mathematical myth, 6 

(Synopsis) 
mentiferous of McDougall, 

55 
real purpose of, 76 
Evolution, failure of unifica- 
tion, 119 
Excitant system, 29, 61, 86 
Extension, 88 



Fallacy of relativity, 149, 150, 
151 

Faraday lines of force, 12 

Faraday tubes, 20, 36 

Fatalism, 123 

Field of force, its implications, 
47 

Fields of interaction, 78 

Finite, 13 

Force, 5, 9, 35, 38 
center, 15, 22 
center of Boscovich, 57 
not an entity, 14 
phase and mass phase, 62 
phase and space form, 63 
phase and time form, 63 

Free choice, 123 

God, 1, 14, 21, 22 
Absolute Reality, 122 
not a machinist, 23 
physical proof of existence, 
24 

Gyratory energons, 83 

Hyperbolic function of the 
Space-Time Potential, 102, 
103, 128 

Hyperbolic logarithms, cal- 
culations involving, 133 

Immanence, 22, 23, 58 

Immortality, assurance of, 124 
universality of belief in, 124 

Impulse, 5 
phase, 63 

Infinite, 13, 23 

Influence I, not a force, state, 
or action, 70 
not a thing, 69 

Inorganic centers, character- 
istics of, 122 

Inorganic world, 118, 122 

Instantaneous dynamics, 93 

Interaction coefficients, 145, 148 

Interdependence, theory of, 2, 
3, 4, 8, 11 (all in Synopsis), 
63, 67, 75, 78 

Interdependent and independent 
motion, 142, 143, 144, 146, 147. 

Inverse first power variation, 
97 

Ionization hypothesis, critic- 
ism of, 112 

Ions in solution, 30 



INDEX TO SUBJECT 



297 



Interaction, according to Bos- 
covich, 57 
fields of, 78 
hypothesis of, 67 
in a unitary system, 63 
of interdependent centers, 
75 
Kaufmann effect, according to 
the Space-Time Potential, 
138 
Keplerian Laws, as developed 
by the Cartesians, 96 
as developed by Newton, 95 
as developed by the Space- 
Time Potential, 99, 126 
Kinetic matter, 62 
Kinetic reaction, 5 
Kinetic reaction phase, 62 
Kosmometer, 108 
Law of identity, 67 
Life entity, A unity, 119 
Light, case of interaction be- 
tween excitant and con- 
current systems, 15 (Syn- 
opsis), 28 
velocity of, is the limiting 
constant of relativity, 29, 
108 
Lines of force, 12 
Logarithmic function of the 
Space-Time Potential, 104, 
134 
Lorentz-Einstein Mass-Veloc- 
ity Relation, 138, Table V 
Macrocosm, 31, 104, 136 
Macrocosm ic Relations, 105 
Mass, 5, 9 
and the ether, 20 
electromagnetic, 79 
not constant, 29 
phase, measurement of, 62 
variation with velocity ac- 
cording to Lorentz-Ein- 
stein, 108 
Mass-acceleration center, 80 
Mass-acceleration kern, 104 
variation with velocity ac- 
cording to Space-Time 
Potential, 108 
Materialism, 91 
fallacious, 10, 11 
horror for vacuum, 22 
house of, 21 



Materialistic science, concepts 
invalid, 3 

Mathematical space, distin- 
guished from real space, 110 

Mathematics, a critique of, 33 

Matter, 5, 38, 61 

as distinct from ether, 48 
as ether in motion, 49 
can it act where it is not?, 

74 
electrical, 20 

Measurement, physical, 62 

Mechanical model, 1, 9 

Mechanism, pure is futile, 2 

Metageometry and space, 110 

Microcosm, 31, 104, 136 

Microcosmic relations, 105 

Millikan, on Bohr atom, 139 

Model of physical universe, 76 

Monism, 91 

Monon, 15, 27 
a unity, 72 

essential qualities of, S2 
negative and positive nature 
of, 81 

Motion, 61 

transmission of according 
to physics, 75 

Neutral ionic pairs, 112 

Newtonian, conception of 
universal gravitation, 7 
(Synopsis) 

gravitational relation ac- 
cording to dynamics, 127 
law of gravitation, 96 
relation, critical analysis of, 

95, 96, 98 
relation, its discrepancy 
with dynamics, 101 

Non-Euclidean geometry, 110 

Non-Newtonian dynamics, 93, 
94 
fundamental functions of, 
128 

Number, incapable of account- 
ing for cosmos, 14 (Synop- 
sis), 32 

Organic centers, 122 

Organic world, 119 

Pangeometry, 110 

Pantheism, 91 

Pearson, Karl, ether hypothe- 
sis of, 50 

Perpetual motion impossible, 
59 



298 



INDEX TO SUBJECT 



Phases of matter, 122 

Physical action, 68 

Physical concepts, relative, 60 

Physical constants, 4 and 5 of 
Synopsis 

Physico-mathematical rela- 
tions of the Space-Time Po- 
tential, 135 

Planetary orbits, 31 

according to the Space-Time 

Potential, 99 
mathematical development 
of according to the Space- 
Time Potential, 125 

Positon, 30, 84, 85 

Potential difference, mainte- 
nance of, 58 

Potential loci, 104 

Predetermination, 123 

Primordial activity center, 27 

Primary or hyperbolic func- 
tion of the Space-Time Po- 
tential, 102, 103, 128 

Primary matter, 80, 86, 122 

Primary world, 122 

Purpose, 8, 92, 124 

Rational world order, 22 

Rationality of world, faith in, 8 

Reaction, 61 

Reason, 8 

Relative reality, 18 (Synop- 
sis), 122 

Relativity, a physical basis of, 
29 
a proof of the Existence of 

God, 59 
complete physical leads to 

negation, 4 (Synopsis) 
concepts, secondary, 63 
fallacy of, 149, 150, 151 
of Lorentz, 108 
of Poincare, 108 
of the Space-Time Poten- 
tial, Synopsis and 108 
ordinary and partial theory 

of, 3 (Synopsis) 
physical, futile, 18 (Synop- 
sis) 

Religious intuition, 121 

Revelation, 91 

Rotary systems, 130 

Scientific renaissance, 79 

Secondary or logarithmic 
function of the Space-Time 
Potential, 104, 134 



Secondary matter, 80, 86, 122 
Selective intelligence, 17, 36, 

43 
Skepticism, absolute, 8 
Space, 6, 7, 9 

defined, 25 

not unreal, 87 
Space-Time Potential, basic 

functions of, 102 
Soul, 13 (Synopsis) 

a unity, 119 

result of a creative act, 120 
Static equilibrium, 104 
Statics and dynamics, rela- 
tivity of, 93 
Subconscious world, 117, 122 
Substance, Spinoza on, 67 
Substratum, physical, 64, 65, 

66 
Teleology, 8, 92, 124 
Theism, scientific, 91 
Thing-in-itself, 66 
Theoria Philosophia Ndturai- 

is, 18, 44 
Thought, as cognition, 120 

as will, 120 
Time, 6, 7, 9 

defined, 26 
Transcendence, 58 

and immanence, 91 

of God, physical proof of, 90 
Tubes of force, 12, 13, 36 
Unitary system, 63 
Unity of things, 73 
Unknowns of science, 4 
Velocity, 5 

phase, 62 
Viton, 12 (Synopsis) 

the life ultimate, 119, 122 
Vortices of Descartes, 44 
Will, of Schopenhauer, 66 
World of subconsciousness, 117 
Worlds, the four, 116 
Work, 5 

done in a cell system, 113 

loci, 104 

loci, relations of to atomic 
structure, 139 

of decomposition, molecular, 
115 

phase, 63 

value, relatively definite for 
each point in space, 80 



Deacidified USKH) mt- o^.'^.'^^^.•tvt■| (-"i-vi :,. 

Neutralizing agent; Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Dec, 2004 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 
1 1 1 Thomson P.irK Pnve 
Ci.:n\.\ii\ T,.nvn:.(Mp. PA 160(>6 



